though i do agree with alot of what TJ is saying ;) The only thing you would need an assault weapon for is to fight the govt if we ever god forbid had tod
----- Original Message ----- From: "Timothy Heald" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 12:50 PM Subject: RE: Court Upholds Calif. Assault Weapons Ban > "The historical record makes it equally plain that the amendment was not adopted in order to afford rights to > individuals with respect to private gun ownership or possession," Judge Stephen Reinhardt wrote in the 9th U.S. Circuit > Court of Appeals decision. > > Here he is talking about the historical record of the court system, which starting in the 1930s with the registration of personal machine guns (not a ban, you can still own them in many states) began limiting access to military style weapons, the exact type that would be used if a true revolution ever were needed here again. Lets take a look at one some of the founders actually had to say about this right, starting with my man TJ (keeping in mind that he wrote the amendment in question): > > > > THOMAS JEFFERSON > > * A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to > the body, it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball, and others of that nature, > are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be your constant companion of > your walks. > --- Thomas Jefferson to Peter Carr, 1785. The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, (Memorial Edition) Lipscomb and Bergh, editors. > > * One loves to possess arms, though they hope never to have occasion for them. > --- Thomas Jefferson to George Washington, 1796. The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, (Memorial Edition) Lipscomb and Bergh, editors. > > * Laws that forbid the carrying of arms... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man. > --- Jefferson's "Commonplace Book," 1774-1776, quoting from On Crimes and Punishment, by criminologist Cesare Beccaria, 1764 > > * "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." > Thomas Jefferson- Proposed Virginia Constitution, 1776, Jefferson Papers 344. > > Now lets see what some of the other founders of this great land had to say: > > > THOMAS PAINE > > * "The balance of power is the scale of peace. The same balance would be preserved were all the world not destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay them aside ... Horrid mischief would ensue were one half the world deprived of the use of them ... the weak will become prey to the strong." > Thomas Paine- Thoughts on Defensive War > > JAMES MADISON > > * "Americans [have] the right and advantage of being armed -- unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust their people with arms." > > > SAMUEL ADAMS > > * "The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms . . ." > > GEORGE MASON > > * "W]hen the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised by an artful man, who was governor of Pennsylvania, to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them; but that they should not do it openly, but weaken them, and let them sink gradually...I ask, who are the militia? They consist of now of the whole people, except a few public officers. But I cannot say who will be the militia of the future day. If that paper on the table gets no alteration, the militia of the future day may not consist of all classes, high and low, and rich and poor..." > George Mason-Virginia Constitution Convention > > NOAH WEBSTER > > * "Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretence, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive." > ---Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution (Philadelphia 1787) > > TENCHE COXE > > * > > "Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man gainst his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American...[T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people." > ---Tenche Coxe, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788. > > > BENJAMIN FRANKLIN > > * > > "They that can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." > > > RICHARD HENRY LEE > > * "A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves ... and include all men capable of bearing arms." > Richard Henry Lee- Senator, First Congress > > > * "To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of people always possess arms..." > > > > ELBRIDGE GERRY > > * "Whenever governments mean to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise an army upon their ruins." > Rep. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts > > > GEORGE WASHINGTON > > * "The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference -- they deserve a place of honor with all that is good." > > > * "A free people ought not only to be armed..." > > > > > PATRICK HENRY > > * "The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able may have a gun." > > > * "Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?" > > > > ALEXANDER HAMILTON > > * "The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed." > > I can only feel sorry for anyone who cannot see that this is an individual right, meant to be an individual right. Howie I read your response. Do the research. It's all there in very plain english. Until there is a constitutional amendment, I truly believe any and all laws that pertain to the ownerships of guns are unconstitutional. Do I violate the law? Of course not, why? Because as these guys new, only those with illicit reasons to violate the law will do so. Your not disarming criminals in this manner. Your enslaving a nation. Your taking the teeth out of the peoples final say. Please I hope whatever side your on pertaining to this issue that you will read this whole email, read the federalist and anti-federalist papers, make up your own mind as to what was intended by that amendment. Then sit down and think about the why. > > If tomorrow there were a constitutional amendment that said I was not permitted any personal firearms I would turn in every gun I own. Because it was change done correctly. To legislate over the constitution, simply because you know you don't have the popular support needed to have an amendment, is sickening to me. It stinks of back door politics and ulterior motives. > > People think about three things. > > 1. Changes in US gun law have been based on the laws of personal firearm ownership of the third reich > > 2. Why do it in this way? Why not just have an amendment that clarifies the intent? Because they know they are wrong and they would loose. > > 3. The senators and congress people that make these laws have armed escorts almost everywhere they go. They always make exceptions to these rules for themselves. Ask yourself why. > > I hope I made at least one of you think. > > Tim > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=5 Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
