|
posted to rec.boats
|
|
external usenet poster
|
|
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Mar 2016
Posts: 894
|
|
Jo Cox
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 6/17/16 1:14 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 6/17/16 1:00 AM, wrote:
The Brits just lost an MP ... shot. I thought they didn't have any
guns there.
There are reports, as yet unconfirmed, that he used a "homemade gun" he
made from plans in a U.S.-based white nationalist publication or
website. Probably a Trump supporter, too.
You need to do a little more research. England has a gun problem. Lots of
the guns were reactivated weapons, from the days when the Brit's could own
anything. Some are starter pistols that have been made usable. Biggest
problem in England is ammo. Sort of like the state of California has
tried. So lots of the ammo is reloads. 100 years ago, the English could
still own any weapon, including machine guns. That was right guaranteed by
a statute from Parliament when the people were worried about despot rulers.
Unfortunately it was a statute and not a Magna Carta type law. So a later
Parliament changed the law. At least we have the 2nd amendment to protect
us from despot rulers. And the 2nd can not be changed by Congress. Seems
as if the SCOTUS has been allowed tho. The 2nd is not about hunting
weapons, it is about politics! Especially bad politics. You say we can not
defeat an army. How many of the military would oppose the people? Russia
stationed soldiers far from their homes, and in different countries, so
they would not have to choose between their neighbors and the government.
With islamoterrism on the rise, we may need more lenient gun laws to
protect ourselves from those who ignore laws anyway.
The 2nd Amendment is no protection against "despot leaders."
Why?
|