This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --_NextPart_000_1063832300_CFX_iMSMail_157158051 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Reserves definitely DO NOT. They are 100% federally controlled under the department of the army. The argument could be made now that the National Guard is just an extension of that same force, now that they can call us to federal service without the governors permission. Tim -----Original Message----- From: Larry C. Lyons [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 5:43 PM To: CF-Community Subject: Re: BREAKING NEWS: Gen. Clark to run for president You all know my views and attitudes about gun control, but I could agree with this. This is exactly what the framers intended, "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." The national guard, reserves etc definitely fit the definition. larry > > See I always have been of the mind that the framers didn't put the firearms >> right in there to allow us to hunt, rather to protect ourselves from >> government, and if necessary revolt. That's why I think assault weapons >> shouldn't be banned. >Yes, they put in for a well armed militia. We've got a standing army now which >should supersede the militia in my mind. But lets work with the militia idea >for >a moment. Should those in the national guard have access to assault rifles? I >think so as they would constitute a well armed militia in my mind. Even those >who have been honorably discharged from the military or who are on >extended/reserve/whatever duty. >Should everyone have access to machine guns? Yes, if they are willing to join >the national guard or other service to help in the protection of this country. > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm?link=i:5:89165 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm?link=t:5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm?link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm --_NextPart_000_1063832300_CFX_iMSMail_157158051 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Reserves definitely DO NOT. They are 100% federally controlled under the department of the army. The argument could be made now that the National Guard is just an extension of that same force, now that they can call us to federal service without the governors permission. Tim -----Original Message----- From: Larry C. Lyons [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 5:43 PM To: CF-Community Subject: Re: BREAKING NEWS: Gen. Clark to run for president You all know my views and attitudes about gun control, but I could agree with this. This is exactly what the framers intended, "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." The national guard, reserves etc definitely fit the definition. larry > > See I always have been of the mind that the framers didn't put the firearms >> right in there to allow us to hunt, rather to protect ourselves from >> government, and if necessary revolt. That's why I think assault weapons >> shouldn't be banned. >Yes, they put in for a well armed militia. We've got a standing army now which >should supersede the militia in my mind. But lets work with the militia idea >for >a moment. Should those in the national guard have access to assault rifles? I >think so as they would constitute a well armed militia in my mind. Even those >who have been honorably discharged from the military or who are on >extended/reserve/whatever duty. >Should everyone have access to machine guns? Yes, if they are willing to join >the national guard or other service to help in the protection of this country. > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]

--_NextPart_000_1063832300_CFX_iMSMail_157158051--

Reply via email to