![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Cecil Chapman wrote:
Sorry Cecil, I won't argue the amendment. I let it stand on it's own as interpreted by the SC. But when someone tries to misinterpret the meaning in order to further their agenda, I speak up. But Jeff,,, I have no agenda... There is no 'plot' against you,,,, no 'secret conspiracy' that I'm trying to pull on you. jeesh "paranoia WILL destroy ya" grin. I'm just trying to approach the issue, logically. Also, the Supreme Court upheld the right to bear arms but in their decision it was not stated that the reason for supporting the right was to assure that the citizens of the U.S. could overthrow the government. Goodness, Jeff! No need to restate what is commonly known by anyone at all literate about the Constitution and those who wrote it. Change the Constitution if you can, but trying to alter the original views of Jefferson, Madison, Franklin, et al, by incorrectly using their words is a sure way to invalidate your argument and doom your cause to failure. I'm not trying to change the Constitution (unlike Bush and Ashcroft who have tried to strip away the most basic guarantees with the 'Patriot' Act). I haven't altered any original views, at all. You seem to be trying to interpret the Constitution in ways that the authors never intended, and that is just as bad as trying to change it outright. But,,,, and I'm asking you to be rational here; do you REALLY think the reason for the second amendment was that the founding fathers wanted to assure that the citizenry would have the ability to overthrow the new government that they were working SO hard to put into place? Jeff? Really??? Isn't a more likely explanation that they recognized that their new country didn't have a lot of money to fund purchasing weapons for a formal army and that they wanted to insure that its' citizens had weaponry so that they could be called up to fight in the event the new country was attacked? .. "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" Yes, that is exactly what the founders had in mind. Can't you do a little research on your own? The comments on the second amendment by various folks involved with authoring the Constitution are easy to find, assuming you really want to know the answer. Matt |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Leaving the community | David Brooks | Instrument Flight Rules | 556 | November 30th 04 08:08 PM |
aero-domains for anybody in the aviation community | secura | Aviation Marketplace | 1 | June 26th 04 07:37 PM |
Unruly Passengers | SelwayKid | Piloting | 88 | June 5th 04 08:35 AM |
Report Leaving Assigned Altitude? | John Clonts | Instrument Flight Rules | 81 | March 20th 04 02:34 PM |
Big Kahunas | Jay Honeck | Piloting | 360 | December 20th 03 12:59 AM |