Re: The Armed Citizen - Missouri

"Some Guy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> "David Hartung" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > "Some Guy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > > Oh, I see what the problem is. You believe guns should be ubiquitous
> until
> > I
> > > can prove they shouldn't be. I believe they should be restricted until
> you
> > > can prove they shouldn't be. In other words, I believe in erring on
the
> > side
> > > of caution.
> >
> > One minor problem, the Constitution disagrees with you.
>
> That's a bold declaration which is unsupported by facts.
>
> http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment02/
>
> "In spite of extensive recent discussion and much legislative action with
> respect to regulation of the purchase, possession, and transportation of
> firearms, as well as proposals to substantially curtail ownership of
> firearms, there is no definitive resolution by the courts of just what
right
> the Second Amendment protects."
>
> Second amendment thinking by lawyerly types is confusing. I have never
read
> any objective opinion that says there is an clear right to own a gun.
There
> might be at some time in the future if the Supreme court rules that way,
but
> so far it hasn't.

Let's do something radical, let's read what the words say! It is quite
plain.