04a28dd0
XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.politics.usa.constitution.gun-rights,
talk.politics.guns
From: wy_@myself.com
On 15 Apr, 17:58, "Scout"
wrote:
> "RD Sandman" wrote in message
>
> news:XnsA1A363041C864hopewell@216.196.121.131...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Scout" wrote in
> >news:kkfjhp$u4n$1@dont-email.me:
>
> >> "wy" wrote in message
> >>news:b168afae-18a8-4ea9-9b74-e492c526af28@w1g2000vbw.googlegroups.com..
> >> .
> >>> On 14 Apr, 12:33, RD Sandman
> >>> wrote:
> >>>> wy wrote
> >>>> innews: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.googlegroups.
> >>>> >>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@c7g2000vbe.googlegr
> >>>> >> >> >>oups .co
> >>>> > m...
>
> >>>> >> >> >> > On 13 Apr, 18:17, David Hartung
> >>>> >> >> >> > wrote:
> >>>> >> >> >> >> On 04/13/2013 04:36 PM, wy wrote:
>
> >>>> >> >> >> >> > On 13 Apr, 17:05, RD Sandman
> >>>> >> >> >> >> > >>>> > t>
> >>>> >> >> >> >> > wrote:
>
> >>>> >> >> >> >> >>> In other words, you don't need a hi cap magazine for
> >>>> >> >> >> >> >>> anythin
> >>>> > g.
>
> >>>> >> >> >> >> >> 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 sens
> >>>> > e
> >>>> >> >> >> >> that
> >>>> >> >> >> >> we arm ourselves with the expectation of facing soldiers
> >>>> >> >> >> >> who wil
> >>>> > l
> >>>> >> >> >> >> be
> >>>> >> >> >> >> armed with automatic weapons and other nasty little
> >>>> >> >> >> >> surprises? I
> >>>> > N
> >>>> >> >> >> >> 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 ye
> >>>> > t in
> >>>> >> >> >> > the ordinary sense. The second amendment gave the right
> >>>> >> >> >> > to bea
> >>>> > r
> >>>> >> >> >> > 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 th
> >>>> > e
> >>>> >> >> >> > second amendment is all about. It wasn't about giving
> >>>> >> >> >> > every Jo
> >>>> > e
> >>>> >> >> >> > Blow
> >>>> >> >> >> > his gun just for the hell of it.
>
> >>>> >> >> >> No, actually protecting the right of every Joe Blow to have
> >>>> >> >> >> his gun
> >>>> > s
> >>>> >> >> >> is
> >>>> >> >> >> exactly the purpose of the 2nd.
>
> >>>> >> >> >> So that when the militia was needed Joe Blow could show up
> >>>> >> >> >> armed an
> >>>> > d
> >>>> >> >> >> 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.
>
> >>>> Neither is your free speech in a newsgroup on the internet. Does
> >>>> that mean you don't have it?
>
> >>> If you actually read, and are able to properly digest, the First
> >>> amendment, it's not so much about giving everyone the right of free
> >>> speech as it is about Congress making no law abridging the freedom of
> >>> speech.
>
> >>> "Congress shall make no law" ... respecting an establishment of
> >>> religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or ... "abridging
> >>> the freedom of speech," or of the press; or the right of the people
> >>> peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress
> >>> of grievances.
>
> >> If you actually read, and are able to properly digest, the Second
> >> amendment, it's not so much about giving everyone the right to keep
> >> and bear arms as it is about Congress making no law abridging the
> >> freedom to keep and bear arms.
Do you even understand the definition of abridge?
>
> >> "...shall not be infringed" ... respecting the right to keep and bear
> >> arms.
>
> >> You were saying?
Yeah, do you even understand the definition of abridge? You can't
explain subordinate clause and you don't know the meaning of the word
abridge. What do you know?
>
> > It's not at all about GIVING people the right to keep and bear arms. It
> > is about making the federal government aware of that right and the fact
> > that it is protected.
>
> I think I said that even though I was using his own words against him.
[continued in next message]
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
