On 2/19/2010 12:55 PM, Scott Loveless wrote:
On 2/19/10, CheekyGeek<[email protected]> wrote:
I'm non-political, but my wife teaches English at a university and I
find myself asking myself, would I feel BETTER about her safety if (in
the world of 2010) I could be sure that EVERY student in her class,
every coworker in her department, every person on the street, was
exercising their "constitutional privilege" of carrying a firearm at
all times? I find the answer is "no" and it becomes an ever stronger
"no" for each armed human in her vicinity, irregardless of their
psychological profile.
Had your wife been in that room in Alabama, what would you have given
for just one of the victims to have been armed and willing to use it
for defense? Are you seriously telling me that you can live with the
deaths of unarmed innocents simply so you can "feel BETTER"?
As to "constitutional privilege", the first two amendments to the US
Constitution are recognized, by the US Supreme Court on multiple
occasions, as a limit on the federal government. In other words,
those rights existed before the formation of the United States and
cannot be taken away. The word "inalienable" is used for a reason.
The Bill of Rights doesn't grant us those rights, it guarantees them.
Everything in the Constitution is a limit on the Federal Government.
The states are where most government is supposed to be.
--
{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033{\fonttbl{\f0\fnil\fcharset0 Courier
New;}}
\viewkind4\uc1\pard\f0\fs20 I've just upgraded to Thunderbird 3.0 and the
interface subtly weird.\par
}
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
