--- "Adam C. Lipscomb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dean wrote:
> > > Not just "the courts" but the Supreme Court, the
> > > group that makes the final
> > > pronouncements on whether laws are
> Constitutional or
> > > not. If you're basing
> > > your argument upon the Constitution (which is
> what
> > > the title of this post
> > > indicates), you've *got* to take into account
> the
> > > opinions of the Supreme
> > > Court.
> >
> > Right, so if their opinions are so valid, then why
> in
> > almost 200 years haven't the non-lawyers in the
> > government started a drive to repeal the 2nd
> > amendment? The Constitution itself provides for
> the
> > common defense, so why have something cluttering
> up
> > the bill of rights if it's redundant and it only
> > serves to let the gun toting wackos have their way
> > sometimes?
>
> I think you're setting up a straw man - neither I
> nor anyone else on this
> thread has advocated either outright banning the
> ownership of guns or repeal
> of the 2nd Amemdment. Nor, for that matter, have we
> referred to anyone as
> "gun toting wackos". I myself prefer the term
> "gundamentalist" myself. ;-)
> I don't have a problem with gun ownership per se,
> but I do have a problem
> with poorly constructed arguments in favor of gun
> ownership.
>
with repealing the 2nd, I didn't say that. I was
saying it was a logical conclusion to how there is
such disagreement on interpretation- if it's so badly
worded or it's granting rights where it shouldn't,
then it should be taken out. I was being smarmy about
the gun totin wackos, I wasn't pointing fingers at
anyone on this board. Have you read my posts in their
entirety? What about them is poorly constructed?
> > > Anything else is just willful ignorance.
> >
> > as is discounting the opinion of all of the people
> who
> > make it their profession to interpret those crusty
> old
> > documents laying around in DC. people who seek
> the
> > truth without a political agenda.
>
> Huh?
Bipartisan congressional committees and people who
work at the library of congress? Congressmen
obviously have a political agenda but they make sure
that when they get reference material it's the about
the truth.
>
> > heh, well who else but lawyers with an agenda* and
> > people who don't like guns, after looking at the
> > second amendment and the rest of the bill of
> rights
> > say that it doesn't guarantee a freedom of the
> people?
> > it's so simple.
>
> Straw man again.
>
huh? what do I need to make more clear?
dean of the rapidly tiring hands
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Spot the hottest trends in music, movies, and more.
http://buzz.yahoo.com/
