The introductory phrase of the second amendment, key to its intent by the writers of the Constitution, has once again been put in abeyance, to whit: "A well regulated Militia".
It's too damn bad that those who love their firearms don't seem to be able to count the cost to society in general of their fixation.
Gettingahandle
Ignorance is Nature's most abundant fuel for decision making.
No, Mark, you've never been able to channel one of the writers of the Constitution; nor have you EVER been able to explain why the phrase is there at all in a document which is sparely worded, with no other extraneous phrases or "examples".
The meaning of your last paragraph is not clear to me. To whom are you referring and is there some special significance to the term "bottle baby"?
Gettingahandle
Ignorance is Nature's most abundant fuel for decision making.
Go back and look over the rest of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Tell me where you see any other "examples".
The phrase starts the second amendment. "One" principal purpose? No. THE principal purpose of that right. And you disregard the fact that the writers, who were subjected to an occupying standing army being foisted on them, had an inherent distrust of standing armies and militias; which was why they used the adjective "well-regulated".
Militias of the time were called up, as necessary, for civil defense of the states. The Federal government could call up an army, also as necessary, for foreign conflicts. Both the intent of the second amendment, and the inherent distrust of standing armies by the writers of the Constitution has been disregarded, debased, and subsumed to interest/power groups over time.
My mother died of breast cancer about twenty eight years ago, two weeks before the birth of her first grandchild, my son. So I can't ask about whether she chose to breast or bottle feed me. Low blow, Mark, and NOT very funny. In the meantime, whatever her choice was, it did NOT result in the deaths of others--as this unfettered lust for gun rights has.
edited to correct subject/verb agreement and replace a preposition
Gettingahandle
Ignorance is Nature's most abundant fuel for decision making.
I've had that (heated) conversation with my father.
Who defines the "arms"? What's to say that one cannot have one's very own personal nuclear device?! The Bill of Rights puts no restrictions or infringements EXCEPT in the context of that limiting phrase "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State".
But gun owners grasp their lethal weapons (pellet guns just lack the menace and heft, dontcha know), and hiss about "cold dead hands"; the irony being, of course, that the cold dead hands are far more likely to belong to another, namely the one they shoot in a berserker rage or the person at the wrong end of a weapon in the hands of somebody who doesn't know its lethal potential. Heck, even in the hands of those who supposedly DO know, "accidents" happen. Ask Harry Whittington who is STILL coping with the residual effects of an ill-judged quail hunting excursion with Deadeye Dick.
Gettingahandle
Ignorance is Nature's most abundant fuel for decision making.
Pages
The introductory phrase of the second amendment, key to its intent by the writers of the Constitution, has once again been put in abeyance, to whit: "A well regulated Militia".
It's too damn bad that those who love their firearms don't seem to be able to count the cost to society in general of their fixation.
Gettingahandle
Ignorance is Nature's most abundant fuel for decision making.
Facts stifle the will, hobble conviction.
Gettingahandle
Ignorance is Nature's most abundant fuel for decision making.
Bald tire in snow... no traction.
No, Mark, you've never been able to channel one of the writers of the Constitution; nor have you EVER been able to explain why the phrase is there at all in a document which is sparely worded, with no other extraneous phrases or "examples".
The meaning of your last paragraph is not clear to me. To whom are you referring and is there some special significance to the term "bottle baby"?
Gettingahandle
Ignorance is Nature's most abundant fuel for decision making.
Facts stifle the will, hobble conviction.
Gettingahandle
Ignorance is Nature's most abundant fuel for decision making.
No need to channel anything.
Go back and look over the rest of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Tell me where you see any other "examples".
The phrase starts the second amendment. "One" principal purpose? No. THE principal purpose of that right. And you disregard the fact that the writers, who were subjected to an occupying standing army being foisted on them, had an inherent distrust of standing armies and militias; which was why they used the adjective "well-regulated".
Militias of the time were called up, as necessary, for civil defense of the states. The Federal government could call up an army, also as necessary, for foreign conflicts. Both the intent of the second amendment, and the inherent distrust of standing armies by the writers of the Constitution has been disregarded, debased, and subsumed to interest/power groups over time.
My mother died of breast cancer about twenty eight years ago, two weeks before the birth of her first grandchild, my son. So I can't ask about whether she chose to breast or bottle feed me. Low blow, Mark, and NOT very funny. In the meantime, whatever her choice was, it did NOT result in the deaths of others--as this unfettered lust for gun rights has.
edited to correct subject/verb agreement and replace a prepositionGettingahandle
Ignorance is Nature's most abundant fuel for decision making.
Facts stifle the will, hobble conviction.
Gettingahandle
Ignorance is Nature's most abundant fuel for decision making.
How do you handle this argument? You have the right to bear arms. You can bear pellet guns and dart guns, but nothing else. The reply might be that
heck no - I expect if it was possible - access to grenade launchers and stinger missiles would be supported.
I've had that (heated) conversation with my father.
Who defines the "arms"? What's to say that one cannot have one's very own personal nuclear device?! The Bill of Rights puts no restrictions or infringements EXCEPT in the context of that limiting phrase "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State".
But gun owners grasp their lethal weapons (pellet guns just lack the menace and heft, dontcha know), and hiss about "cold dead hands"; the irony being, of course, that the cold dead hands are far more likely to belong to another, namely the one they shoot in a berserker rage or the person at the wrong end of a weapon in the hands of somebody who doesn't know its lethal potential. Heck, even in the hands of those who supposedly DO know, "accidents" happen. Ask Harry Whittington who is STILL coping with the residual effects of an ill-judged quail hunting excursion with Deadeye Dick.
Gettingahandle
Ignorance is Nature's most abundant fuel for decision making.
Facts stifle the will, hobble conviction.
Gettingahandle
Ignorance is Nature's most abundant fuel for decision making.
Pages