Re: Fifth Circuit v. U.S. Supreme Court

"Morton Davis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> "Leif Rakur" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Has the Supreme Court really said that the reserve militia of the
> > states includes 10-year-old girls, 80-year-old diabetics, and the
> > legally blind?
> >
> >
> Who gives a fuck? Your every argument is about the same thing. When the
shit
> hits the fan, the militia is liable to take about anyone who can shoot. A
> legally blind man with a shotgun can be damned deadly in close quarters.
So
> can an 80-year old diabetic who can shoot.
>
> You problem is: it's A well-regulated militia beinnecessary to a free
state
> and NOT the well-regultaged militia being necessary to a free state. The
> right of the people to keep and bear arms is not tied to ANY militia. It
is
> an individual right that pre-existed the Constitution.
>
> Lying sacks of shit like you I can tolerate only so long. Right now,
you've
> crossed the edge of how far I am going to be even vaguely nice to you. One
> of the tops in the field on the Second Amendment, David E. Young has layed
> it out to you nicely. Others have layed it out nicely to you. I'm done.
> You're a lying fucktard sack of shit, worth less than a dung beatle turd.
>
> <plonk>
>
> -*MORT*-

David D. Bach v. Pataki et al (Sept 2003)

http://www.nysd.uscourts.gov/courtweb/pdf/D02NYNC/03-07878.PDF

"In view of the weight of authority, including the present state of Supreme
Court and Second Circuit jurisprudence, the Court adopts the view that the
Second Amendment is not a source of individual rights."

SG