The founders did indeed envision that tyranny, being a natural outgrowth of
consolidated power, would need to be checked by the right to keep and bear
arms.

The second amendment- second only to the first amendment- is indeed 1) the
only practical way to enforce the other nine; and 2) the "reboot button" for
the republic.

It is fascinating to go back and re-read the federalist/anti-federalist
arguments engaged in at the time of our founding. How far have we strayed;
and all of it so predictable. We are currently living the worst fears of
those who opposed a strong central government. Many of the checks and
balances have been tossed, one by one, over the gunwales in order to address
one "unfairness" or the other over the years.

Liberty for Security and all that.

Anyhow, this is not a political forum (gee- sure looks like one) so I'll let
everyone else have the last word.

As if that would stop 'em . . .

Steve Swartz


"Paul J. Adam" wrote in message
...
In message , Leslie Swartz
writes
The good news is most of you radical assholes, being anti-RKBA, will roll
up
pretty quickly.

Am I a "radical asshole"? I'm a "gun nut" by UK standards.

Steve, just to clarify, are you advocating the deliberate murder of
anyone who disagrees with your opinion? I'd definitely think that the
Founding Fathers didn't envisage an Argentinean-style "dirty war"
against their own people when they drafted the Constitution.



--
He thinks too much: such men are dangerous.
Julius Caesar I:2

Paul J. Adam MainBoxatjrwlynch[dot]demon{dot}co(.)uk