To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 17741
17740  |  17742
Subject: 
Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Tue, 24 Sep 2002 06:12:56 GMT
Viewed: 
4183 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Mike Petrucelli writes:
> > I don't care if you own a gun--it comes with a free society.  But don't
> > think it comes from the 2nd.  Here's the point: The 2nd says "In order to
> > maintian a well regulated militia, people have the right to bear arms."
> > (whatever, is close)
> 
> No, not close, in fact completely wrong.  The 2nd says "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."
> 
> [snip]
> > You cannot have it both ways--you cannot uphold the ideals of democracy and
> > say at the same time, 'if they don't listen to me I will shoot them' for
> > that's *not* democracy, that's tyranny.
> 
> If you bother to read...
> http://news.lugnet.com/off-topic/debate/?n=17657
> 
> The point of the second amendment is to allow the people to overthrow the
> government when it becomes tyrannical and REINSTATE the republic.

It says "the security of a free state", not "the maintaining of a free state
from internal tyrants" or even "securing a free state".  It's a long reach
to place your interpretation on the law as written.

Bruce



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
 
(...) Yes, but Mike's interpretation is supported by a thousand documents from the time. Why are you folks arguing this? If you don't want guns in America, change the constitution (if we let you :-). But what it means is really clear. Chris (24 years ago, 24-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
 
(...) No, not close, in fact completely wrong. The 2nd says "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." [snip] (...) If you bother to read... (...) (24 years ago, 24-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

220 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR