Re: Kiddie exercises his right to bear arms

"cor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> 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.

so did speech, in those days.  they didn't have the internet, movies, or
video games.  but, the principles apply to these NEW forms of speech as well

technology changes.  principles don't

whit

> 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.