 | | Re: National vote on handguns?
|
|
In my opinion, your example of wolves and sheep doesn't hold water because we are all Americans (man, woman, young, old). Our country was founded on the very personal beliefs of freedom and democracy of several "founding fathers." It has grown (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: National vote on handguns?
|
|
(...) OK, sorry if I was unclear, I'll try to spell it out more clearly. Why do you want a referendum, which would be a novel and likely to be challenged procedure, instead of the accepted way of doing it? If you are right about the level of (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: National vote on handguns?
|
|
Let me give you something to think about when you say "One person, one vote." , say you have a society made up of 5 wolves and 4 sheep, and they're going to take a vote on what's for dinner. I don't think the sheep are going to like the one vote (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: National vote on handguns?
|
|
(...) Then I should have said 2 senates seats for each state and any number reps based on districts. Now, the greater point is it takes INDIVIDUALS to vote. JT noted that this isn't "mob rule" yet people, you and me, make it all happen. That is the (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: National vote on handguns?
|
|
(...) On the contrary, I think the handgun advocates would not "win." Either way, I say let the American public decide, not the lobbyists (on both sides) and not the politicians on their payroll. Dan (23 years ago, 22-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A Brave New World
|
|
(...) 45 seconds of Googling gave: (URL) in the UK, went to Eton and Oxford. Wrote BNW in 1931. Moved to the US in 1937. So, no, sorry, not American. BNW is no longer required reading in English schools? It's still a fresh and interesting read (and (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The position of authority (was: Handgun Death Rate)
|
|
Could you clarify this paragraph for me, please? (...) This confused me. If the government currently is oppressive, but not bad enough to actually rebel against, why would I want to give up my arms now? I may well be working for political change, (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: National vote on handguns?
|
|
(...) Um, no, it doesn't. In fact the smallest states are guaranteed 3 votes (one rep and 2 senate seats contribute those three votes) meaning they have a proportionally larger voice in the election of the president than the large states do. As the (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: National vote on handguns?
|
|
Hi jt!!! (...) And thank goodness for that! I think the process I suggested of proposing an amendment using the mechanisms in place is a better one (and more likely, BY DEFINITION, to survive a constitutional challenge). Daniel, I'm curious why you (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Handgun Death Rate
|
|
Thanks for the clarification! :-) (...) If I left you with the impression that I am making that assumption, I was unclear and I apologise because I really did not intend to say that. I realise there is a risk in any journey that you may not end up (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
