On 6/4/2021 8:17 AM, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote:
I would say that the original 1787 Constitution that permitted the 3/5
compromise was the most sloppily written. This was the so-called
compromise that implicitly allowed slavery. The second amendment
basically scares the willies out of the modern progressive, who seeks
to impose sort of a national oligarchy
The left is pushing an /oligarchy/?? Rule by the super-rich, like Musk
and Koch and Bezos? I don't think "oligarchy" means what you think it
means.
Brent
against an unwilling people at least the 75 million of us idiots who
voted for the orange guy. Hence the huge push for things like CRT, and
transgenders competing in women's sports and online media censorship
and the control of banks by people who are of a progressive bent. I
turn people of a progressive bent are really those sort of liberals
who seem to be highly tolerant of Soviet socialism. Now this is even
so, that they are funded by globalist China facing corporations. The
issue sort of breaks down to the old Union tune which had a lyric that
went something like that " which side are you on boy, which side are
you on?"
My point in that observation is that we still live in a nation-state
age we still behave tribally and if we don't other tribes implicitly
and explicitly will. Witness the CCP in XI China. So until something
changes in the world in which we all must live, something
technological I suspect, AI is the first thing that jumps to my wee
brain, we must dance like the puppets we are to the tune that is
called by our collective nature's. Governments that don't go
nationalist at this point in time yes even in the 21st century will
see themselves kicked out of office at the very least witness what's
happening in Europe. We must have something that replaces nationalism
just as we must have something that replaces fossil fuels and switch
over while we run things concurrently.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Friday, June 4, 2021 John Clark <[email protected]>
wrote:
On Thu, Jun 3, 2021 at 8:29 PM 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
/> It's not nearly as thin as the air that says it's a musket.
It's the obvious functional interpretation. /
I interpret that to mean you don't believe in the "original intent"
interpretation.
> /The use of "arms" to mean any weapon is clearly a derivative
extension of what a combatant originally wielded with his arm.
/
Well, I admit a linguist would say the weapon meaning of the word
"arms" is derived from the word for the limbs human beings used to
manipulate things, and a linguist would also say the derivation of the
word "calculus" comes from the Greek word for small stone or pebble,
but I don't think having completed a study of pebbles will help you
much on a calculus exam.
>> In 1787 the people that made cannons andwarships were called
arms manufacturers and that hasn't changed.It may be absurd
but that's the world we live in because nuclear weapons are
called "arms'', remember the SALT talks from the 1970s, the
Strategic Arms Limitation Talks? They were about the reduction
in the number of nuclear weapons manufactured by the US and USSR.
/> But they certainly didn't mean that in order to have well
regulated militia people had the right to keep and bear frigates. /
True, it's impossible for one man to carry a frigate, but it's
certainly possible for one man to carry and activate a nuclear
warhead, so I don't see your point. I'm also surprised to hear you
bring up the "well regulated militia" bit because for years courts
have been pretending that line didn't exist in the Constitution. The
only well regulated militias are state national guard units, and only
a tiny percentage of the population are members of the national guard,
but there are more privately owned guns in the US than there are
people in the country. And even when national guard members are called
to duty they don't use their personal guns, they use weapons provided
by the state.
I think the second amendment is the most sloppily written part of the
constitution, and that's really saying something considering what a
very imperfect document it is. At least the parts about slavery are
clear, they're not stupid, they're just evil.
John K Clark See what's on my new list at Extropolis
<https://groups.google.com/g/extropolis>
,
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
an email to [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv1723kyimuWSppY8U5mhHUoSBsCv4w6n0n9TsfASLO3Bg%40mail.gmail.com
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv1723kyimuWSppY8U5mhHUoSBsCv4w6n0n9TsfASLO3Bg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
an email to [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/1079295814.2474553.1622819820317%40mail.yahoo.com
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/1079295814.2474553.1622819820317%40mail.yahoo.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/ce4de229-f9e6-cbf2-af72-beeda2a277dd%40verizon.net.
