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

On Tue, 02 Dec 2003 02:20:13 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (James Mayer) wrote:

>On Tue, 02 Dec 2003 01:55:03 GMT, Steve Krulick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>David Lentz wrote:
>>> 
>>> Steve Krulick wrote:
>>> 
>>> <snip>
>>> 
>>> > > > Look at the court cases. You're wrong.
>>> > >
>>> > > Wrong.  The federal government has no constitutional authority to
>>> > > infringe on the private ownership of weapons.
>>> >
>>> > Wrong. The Const says nothing about private ownership of guns
>>> > one way or the other. But as regulation and restriction is NOT
>>> > the same as infringement, your point is moot.
>>> >
>>> > LOVE v. PEPERSACK No. 94-1582. United States Court of Appeals,
>>> > Fourth Circuit.
>>> > Decided Feb. 3, 1995.
>>> 
>>> Learn to read.
>>
>>Don't patronize me Lint.
>>
>>The answer is right in that cite, if you'd only read and
>>comprehended it:
>>
> Steve Krulick consistantly posts court cases that are based on faulty
>
>assumptions of the courts and reliance on politically biased material.
>It 
>seems that he refuses to cross check the material in those cases with
>the 
>material those courts reference as used in their decisions.   He
>accuses 
>me of having "unsubstantiated opinion(s)" but I did a little research
>and believe that my findings bear out and substantiate my assertions.
>

It doesn' t matter what YOU, the gunslinger, believes.  You're not going to have it 
your way!
  
    The Speedbyrd :>