1c090ab0
XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.politics.usa.constitution.gun-rights,
talk.politics.guns
From: me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net
"wy" wrote in message
news:393918e0-2d7c-4ec8-aff8-afd0eab3c1d1@cd3g2000vbb.googlegroups.com...
> On 14 Apr, 22:48, "Scout"
> wrote:
>> "wy" wrote in message
>>
>> news:709235cd-ed8e-4a20-adb0-abdc4220763d@a3g2000vbr.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > On 14 Apr, 21:01, "Scout"
>> > wrote:
>> >> "wy" wrote in message
>>
>> >>news:ad458066-16bb-4921-97e9-bd8ca06c42b4@f18g2000vbs.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> >> > On 14 Apr, 01:58, "Scout"
>> >> >
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> >> "wy" wrote in message
>>
>> >> >>news:927674ce-ac3d-4fbe-899d-3718991c46b0@e13g2000vbn.go
glegroups.com...
>>
>> >> >> > On 13 Apr, 20:40, Steve wrote:
>> >> >> >> On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 15:57:24 -0700 (PDT), wy
>> >> >> >> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >On 13 Apr, 18:50, "Scout"
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> "wy" wrote in message
>>
>> >> >> >> >>news:5d978267-11aa-41d3-ab47-8b86c12119b4@c7g2000v
e.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.
>>
>> >> >> >> There is no such stipulation in the Second Amendment. There is
>> >> >> >> nothing in the 2A that suggests that the RKBA is limited to the
>> >> >> >> militia, MR i...@email.com
>>
>> >> >> > "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a
>> >> >> > free
>> >> >> > State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not
>> >> >> > be
>> >> >> > infringed."
>>
>> >> >> > Is one's backyard included in that?
>>
>> >> >> Absolutely,.
>>
>> >> > Not mentioned in the Constitution. Next.
>>
>> >> "...shall not be infringed."
>>
>> >> What part of that do you have trouble with?
>>
>> > "Militia"
>>
>> Sorry, but I don't see that word in that portion of the 2nd.
>
> It's in the same 2nd.
But not in the section I asked you what part you had trouble with.
Apparently that's your problem. You don't understand simple English.
>> >> >> > I thought not.
>>
>> >> >> But then your thinking is flawed.
>>
>> >> > You're not disproving anything. Next.
>>
>> >> I'm disproving your claims about the 2nd.
>>
>> > You're doing a pretty piss-poor job of it.
>>
>> Na, you're just a piss poor student.
>>
>> I note you've refused to address the analysis of the 2nd's grammatical
>> construction that shows you're full of crap....but I didn't really expect
>> you to.
>>
>> It just confirmed what I already know. You don't care about the facts.
>
> You don't know what a subordinate clause is.
I certainly do.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
