Just because it's part of the Constitution does not mean that it's right. After all, the Constitution is a living document and must change as time goes by. Over 200 years have passed and I certainly don't have the same fears of the government now as the authors of the Constitution had then. Maybe it's time for a new amendment.
Timothy Heald wrote: >Beyond all of the "feelings" based debate, we in the US have an amendment. The text >of which is: > >"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." > >Now this mentions both the state and the people, therefore there is debate over whose >right this is speaking of. But follow the structure of the sentence and I think it >is plain. > >Justification = A well-regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free >State > >The right = the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed. > >Pretty basic if you ask me. We have stretched the first amendment to say that a >crucifix in urine is an expression of free speech, yet we cannot allow the citizens >of America to be secure in the right to defend themselves. > >I mean if you read the writings of the times, especially Thomas Jefferson, who wrote >the document, you will see that the founding fathers were very much for the populace >owning military style weapons. There was even a point in our history where such was >required by law (a rifle, 100 rounds and a backpack). > >As such, I cannot agree with any gun legislation (even that which already exists) >without a constitutional amendment that over rides the 2nd. I follow the law, I just >don't support it. > >Tim > >-----Original Message----- >From: Nick McClure [mailto:cf-lists@;king-nacho.com] >Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2002 10:07 AM >To: CF-Community >Subject: RE: Possible Sniper Arrest > > >You people are weird? ;) > >Or maybe we are the weird ones. If you look at the gun related crime in >this country, there are usually other crimes. The gun makes it faster >and easier for the criminal. > >Look at the stats for Homicide in 1999: >Handguns - 7950 >Other Guns - 2168 >Knives - 2049 >Other - 2546 >Blunt Objects - 903 >(http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/weapons.htm) > >I can't find stats on the mitigating factors of the crime, but it does >show that gun use is high among the younger generation. > > > >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Will Swain [mailto:will@;hothorse.com] >>Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2002 9:33 AM >>To: CF-Community >>Subject: RE: Possible Sniper Arrest >> >>"As to the victims, think about it from a criminal mind. If a law >> >> >were > > >>passed making weapon ownership illegal, then you know there is a much >>lower chance of retaliation for things like break-ins or hold-ups. >> >> >More > > >>violent crimes such as assault, rape and kidnappings probably would >> >> >not > > >>be affected, but if there is a known reduction in resistance what is >> >> >to > > >>stop an increase in crime?" >> >>But that just isn't the case here. Infact, we have less violent crime. >> >> >How > > >>do you explain that? >> >>w >> >> > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_community This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting.
