Re: Kiddie exercises his right to bear arms

Koc77 wrote:
> 
> "cor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
...
> The second amendment states that "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."  When the constitution was written, all able
> bodied males were the militia.  If  "the people"  in the first, fourth,
> ninth, and tenth amendments means the common people, how is it that "the
> people" in the second amendment means the state?
> 
> Have a good one man.
> 
> -Kevin C.

May be you are right. may be "People" can not have two meanings there.
On the other hand in those days "arms" meant something different.
In those days they had no automatic weapons, no cesium 137 bombs, no Napalm,
no tanks, no bombers, no cluster bombs, no home-made anthrax powder, no
genetically modified camel-pox, no AK-47 dealers selling to gangs and 
no IRscopes with laser guides. In those days they did not even have 
the nut cases that the wars of today seem to generate. No Malvos, 
No Timothy McVeighs, maybe not even war-traumatized militia comming 
back home to beat and gun down their own wife and kids.
Maybe some things have to change, some definitions cleared.

Have a good one too, Kevin.