Subject:
|
Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 24 Sep 2002 09:57:06 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1455 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Bruce Schlickbernd writes:
> 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.
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
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
|
| (...) On a relatined point, has this ever been overturned: If you scroll down to "THESECOND AMENDMENT IN THE COURTS" at (URL) find: ==+== "Since Miller, the Supreme Court has addressed the Second Amendment twice more, upholding New Jersey’s strict (...) (22 years ago, 24-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
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
|
|
|
|
