Re: The 2ed Amendment as a Gun Nuts Wet Dream

AH#49 wrote:
> 
> ulTRAX wrote:
> >
> > "Roger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> > > "Buckaroo Banzai" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > Steve, you can try and warp the meaning of those twenty-seven words in any
> > > > manner you like, but their meaning is quite clear to any clear-thinking
> > > > person.  The Goverment *cannot* infringe on the individual's right to keep
> > > > and bear arms.
> > >
> > > As long as they are part of a well regulated militia, you are right.
> > > Otherwise, it can, has, and continues to "infringe" on individuals right to
> > > keep and bear arms.
> > >
> > > Look at the court cases. You're wrong.
> >
> > And since the government provides the weapons for today's well
> > regulated militia.... the 2ed amendment seems to have little meaning.
> 
> The second amendment isn't about the Government or its army's, you
> ninny!

And who, other than you just now, made that bogus claim,
strawslinger?

The 2nd Amen is about the PEOPLE, being the enfranchised body
politic in its collective and political capacity, and ITS
democratically organized, maintained, controlled, armed, and
manned militia!

In over 200 years, the feds have NOT FAILED to provide for the
arming of the militias, just as the Const requires, and as
founders like Mason, Henry, Martin, and Jefferson feared would
happen, hence, their reason for calling for such an amendment.

-- 
Steven Krulick / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ellenville NY 12428-130727