ATC Handling of Low-Fuel American Flight

"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."

That is as clear as can be, yet several thousand laws are
passed and people continue to argue about what it means.


--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm



"Sam Spade" wrote in message
...
| Jim Macklin wrote:
|
| All words are subject to interpretation and very few
words
| are absolutely clear.
| Otherwise, why are there so many lawyers and why do
lawyer
| write the laws?
|
|
| Because few regulations are as clear as the 91.113
language I previously
| cited. No competent lawyer would try to find wiggle room
in that
| language. If he did, a federal judge would throw him out
of court.

"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."

That is as clear as can be, yet several thousand laws are
passed and people continue to argue about what it means.

Actually, this is quite fuzzy. The antecedent clause really muddies up
the waters. It =could= have been written "The right of the people to
keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." That would be clear. But
it wasn't.

Jose
--
Humans are pack animals. Above all things, they have a deep need to
follow something, be it a leader, a creed, or a mob. Whosoever fully
understands this holds the world in his hands.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

You should read the versions prior to the final. It is very
clear, although there is a tendency to add two commas that
were not part of the original as voted on in the Senate in
1789. That really muddies up the water.

Of course the people,who wrote it remembered that the
Revolution started with British attempts to confiscate arms
at Concord and Lexington and the Bill of Rights read in
conjunction with the Declaration of Independence, and
considering Patrick Henry's speeches on the subject during
the Virginia ratification debates, it makes perfect sense.
Under Ashcraft, the DOJ even got it right in the report
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm


"Jose" wrote in message
t...
| "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."
|
| That is as clear as can be, yet several thousand laws
are
| passed and people continue to argue about what it means.
|
| Actually, this is quite fuzzy. The antecedent clause
really muddies up
| the waters. It =could= have been written "The right of
the people to
| keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." That would be
clear. But
| it wasn't.
|
| Jose
| --
| Humans are pack animals. Above all things, they have a
deep need to
| follow something, be it a leader, a creed, or a mob.
Whosoever fully
| understands this holds the world in his hands.
| for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Jim Macklin wrote:
You should read the versions prior to the final. It is very
clear, although there is a tendency to add two commas that
were not part of the original as voted on in the Senate in
1789. That really muddies up the water.

Of course the people,who wrote it remembered that the
Revolution started with British attempts to confiscate arms
at Concord and Lexington and the Bill of Rights read in
conjunction with the Declaration of Independence, and
considering Patrick Henry's speeches on the subject during
the Virginia ratification debates, it makes perfect sense.
Under Ashcraft, the DOJ even got it right in the report
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm


Fuzzy is fuzzy and that is fuzzy. Plus, you have to wade through all
the background material in an attempt to determine "legislative intent."
It will forever be challenged by the meaning of militia.

Not so with the 91.113 clause previously cited in this thread.

"Jim Macklin" writes:

"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."

That is as clear as can be, yet several thousand laws are
passed and people continue to argue about what it means.*

The Constitution also prohibits involuntary servitude except as punishment for
a crime, but that has never stopped military conscription.

Essentially the Constitution means whatever the political winds of the day
want it to mean, which is why it survives.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.