d5cf1224
XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.politics.usa.constitution.gun-rights,
talk.politics.guns
From: wy_@myself.com
On 13 Apr, 18:50, "Scout"
wrote:
> "wy" wrote in message
>
> news:5d978267-11aa-41d3-ab47-8b86c12119b4@c7g2000vbe.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 13 Apr, 18:17, David Hartung wrote:
> >> On 04/13/2013 04:36 PM, wy wrote:
>
> >> > On 13 Apr, 17:05, RD Sandman
> >> > wrote:
>
> >> >>> In other words, you don't need a hi cap magazine for anything.
>
> >> >> So? What does need have to do with it? Do you need a V-8 or a V-6 in
> >> >> your car. Do you even need a 4?
>
> >> > When it comes to killing, need has everything to do with it? How many
> >> > times and how quickly do you *need* to kill?
>
> >> Look at the wording of the Second Amendment, and then go back a learn
> >> what the founders had to say about it. The purpose of an armed citizenry
> >> is to protect the country from invaders, and if necessary, from the
> >> government itself. That being the purpose, does it not make sense that
> >> we arm ourselves with the expectation of facing soldiers who will be
> >> armed with automatic weapons and other nasty little surprises? IN such a
> >> scenario, limiting the size of clips, could mean more dead citizens.
>
> > America had a tiny army in the late 1700s, too tiny to cover the
> > territory of the time. It wasn't even a full-fledged nation yet in
> > the ordinary sense. The second amendment gave the right to bear arms
> > for a militia to do the job of what the army couldn't do at the time.
> > The militias were a deputized form of the army. That's what the
> > second amendment is all about. It wasn't about giving every Joe Blow
> > his gun just for the hell of it.
>
> No, actually protecting the right of every Joe Blow to have his guns is
> exactly the purpose of the 2nd.
>
> So that when the militia was needed Joe Blow could show up armed and able to
> perform his function in the militia.
Right. Within the function of a militia, not outside of it. The
second amendment stipulates "militia," not one's backyard.
>
> > The concept of militias was replaced
> > by the Militia Act of 1903 which replaced them with the National
> > Guard. By extension, the right to bear arms now applies to the
> > National Guard. Not every Joe Blow in the country.
>
> Sorry, but the right isn't that of the militia, but of the people.
People within a militia. You can't have a militia of kittens.
>
> Are you no longer able to vote because you're not in the National Guard?
>
> Think on that carefully before you answer.
I won't. It's a stupid question.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
