2b1cd7d3
XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.politics.usa.constitution.gun-rights,
talk.politics.guns
From: wy_@myself.com
On 15 Apr, 19:22, RD Sandman
wrote:
> wy wrote innews:8d4b5097-a051-4359-a821-049f
b7831c0@y14g2000vbk.googlegroups.com:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 15 Apr, 12:32, RD Sandman
> > wrote:
> >> wy wrote in
> >> news:0ea301b1-7770-4a76-824e-03eeb2adcbe7
> >> @x14g2000vba.googlegroups.com:
>
> >> > On 14 Apr, 19:08, RD Sandman
> >> > wrote:
> >> >> wy wrote in news:1c4a7b97-8e85-4f6e-ab4f-
> >> 2e462ca50ce4
> >> >> @a6g2000vbm.googlegroups.com:
>
> >> >> > On 14 Apr, 17:09, Wayne wrote:
> >> >> >> On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 11:02:31 -0700 (PDT), wy
> >> wrote:
> >> >> >> > On 14 Apr, 12:29, RD Sandman
> >> >> >> > wrote:
> >> >> >> > > wy wrote
>
> >> >> >> innews:8ac7ca0d-4fb3-476f-85bd-415afec5a910@r7=>
>
> >> >> g2000vbw.googlegroups.> 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 citizen
> >> >> >> > > > ry
> >> >> >> > > >> >> 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.
>
> >> >> >> > > It states, "...the right of the people to keep and bear
> >> >> >> arms....". It
> >> >> >> > > does not say the right of the people while they are in the
> >> >> >> militia or the
> >> >> >> > > right of the militia or the right of the people while
> >> >> >> > > running
> >> to
> >> >> >> join the
> >> >> >> > > militia.
> >> >> >> > It also states "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to
> >> >> >> > the security of a free State," which you keep conveniently
> >> >> >> > ignoring
> >> as
> >> >> >> > being the first part of the same sentence that completes a
> >> >> >> > single thought.
>
> >> >> >> "A well regulated school system, being necessary for education,
> >> >> >> the right of the people to read shall not be infringed"
>
> >> >> >> Your logic, if schools are eliminated, or if you don't go to
> >> school,
> >> >> >> you lose your right to read???
>
> >> >> > If there was no school system, there would be no need for people
> >> >> > to learn to read to justify a system that doesn't exist. �See
> >> >> > h
> > ow it
> >> >> > works? �If no militia, then no need for people to bear arms.
> > �Get i
> >> > t?
>
> >> >> Nope. �Do you honestly think that the only reason anyone in th
> > e world
> >> h
> >> > as
> >> >> a firearm is so they can serve in a militia? �Really......
>
> >> > You're still not explaining why militia was even included in the
> >> > second amendment if the amendment is only supposed to be about
> >> > people having a right to bear arms. When you can make sense out of
> >> > that, maybe I'll get it.
>
> >> To get it, you need to understand a few facts:
>
> >> The Bill of Rights does not define or grant rights it protects them.
> >> The Antifederalists were afraid of an overreaching central
> >> government. They feared the feds could set up a select militia or
> >> standing army. The federal militia was to be armed via Article I,
> >> section 8, clause 16.
>
[continued in next message]
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
