Saying you can't have it isn't regulation, it's prohibition.
On Jun 13, 2014 3:17 PM, "Eric Roberts" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>
> And both also confirmed that the right is regulateable...
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: LRS Scout [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Friday, June 13, 2014 1:41 PM
> To: cf-community
> Subject: RE: Another good visualization about mass shootings
>
>
> But the individual right, and reasoning for it remain, and the court had
> backed that up in both Heller and McDonald On Jun 13, 2014 2:28 PM, "Eric
> Roberts" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> >
> > At the time...it was able bodied males...not everyone.  The militia
> > act of
> > 1904 got rid of the militia system, so the militia that existed at the
> > time of the consittution's writing no longer exists.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: LRS Scout [mailto:[email protected]]
> > Sent: Friday, June 13, 2014 12:42 PM
> > To: cf-community
> > Subject: RE: Another good visualization about mass shootings
> >
> >
> > It's in clauses, who is the militia, all of the people.
> >
> > Commas man.
> >
> > It is a recognized individual right, it is incorporated nationally
> > both by the supremacy clause and the 14th amendment.
> >
> > If you think that's wrong the correct legal remedy is an amendment to
> > the constitution.
> > On Jun 13, 2014 11:48 AM, "Eric Roberts"
> > <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Actually...no it wasn't.  It was about keeping the militia armed.
> > > We no longer have the militia system. (with exception)  That was
> > > replaced by
> > the
> > > national guard, which is armed by the government.   Please read the
> > Militia
> > > Act of 1904.
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: LRS Scout [mailto:[email protected]]
> > > Sent: Friday, June 13, 2014 8:50 AM
> > > To: cf-community
> > > Subject: Re: Another good visualization about mass shootings
> > >
> > >
> > > Yup, do you know what their standard was?
> > >
> > > Anything that is used by a basic infantry company.  Does it have
> > > combat utility.
> > >
> > > Why?
> > >
> > > Because the right is about the common defense, the military style
> > > rifle is the specific item most protected by this amendment.  The
> > > right is a right to kill in the face of tyranny.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 9:43 AM, Eric Roberts <
> > > [email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Tim,
> > > >
> > > > Even in your favorite SCOTUS decision, Heller, as well as in many
> > > > other decisions on the subject, the SCOTUS has even said that the
> > > > 2nd amendment is regulatateable.
> > > >
> > > > Eric
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: LRS Scout [mailto:[email protected]]
> > > > Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2014 10:59 PM
> > > > To: cf-community
> > > > Subject: Re: Another good visualization about mass shootings
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I disagree.
> > > >
> > > > I think absolute, endowed by our creator, natural
> > > >
> > > > They describe the same thing.
> > > >
> > > > Birth right.
> > > >
> > > > But even then, like I said, amend the constitution. Do it right.
> > > > Define the right better.
> > > >
> > > > Otherwise the first and forth and fifth through eighth and
> > > > fourteenth mean nothing at all.
> > > >
> > > > We have an amendment process.
> > > > On Jun 12, 2014 11:53 PM, "Judah McAuley" <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Hey, Tim, quick reminder: Rights are not absolute.
> > > > >
> > > > > None of them. Not a single damn one, enumerated in the
> > > > > Constitution or otherwise amongst the laws deemed Natural.
> > > > >
> > > > > I am a hard core supporter of the 4th Amendment. And the 1st.
> > > > > We've got some agreement in those areas. Still, however, they
> > > > > are not absolute. They exist within a context where rights and
> > > > > responsibilities are, at times, opposed to one another. That is
> > > > > a matter
> > > > for law, government, and society.
> > > > >
> > > > > Your fetishization of the 2nd Amendment has pushed it beyond
> > > > > reason, to a state where it is considered absolute. That is wrong.
> > > > > It was never that way, in the minds of the Framers or any
> > > > > reasonable leader since. You've lost site of what makes our
> > > > > country great. Get some
> > > > perspective, dude.
> > > > >
> > > > > Judah
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 12:04 PM, LRS Scout <[email protected]>
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Totally screwing up the market in the process.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Applying pressure on banks to not service gun related businesses.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Look at what the ATF has been doing to Aires arms, who
> > > > > > operates totally with in the law.  In that specific case the
> > > > > > ATF have no legal authority
> > > > > to
> > > > > > do what they're doing, in effect they are the criminals.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now!
http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion
Archive: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:370956
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm

Reply via email to