| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|
#2
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
A call for tourists to avoid Florida...
In article , dump-on-
says... On 4/2/12 7:26 AM, BAR wrote: In , lid says... On 4/1/2012 5:50 PM, JustWait wrote: On 4/1/2012 4:45 PM, thumper wrote: On 3/31/2012 8:28 AM, BAR wrote: The right to keep and bear arms has implicit within it the abiltiy to defend ones self from aggressors. Otherwise, why would there be a 2nd amendment? It apparently had more to do with "a well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state" than individual self defense. "It apparently"? LOL, another one who makes it up as he goes along. It is apparent. You have a problem with a literal interpretation of the second amendment? It doesn't mention individual self defense, I'm not making that up. "..., the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." Do you understand the meaning of "shall" and the meaning of "not". Do you understand that the amendment mentions "State" and "people" explicitly. The clause "the right of the people to keep and bear arms" has a specific and direct meaning. If it had been a right granted only to the States then they would not have added the second clause, explicitly identifying the people. Whatever it means, it surely doesn't mean you can chase down a kid who is carrying an iced tea and a bag of candy and shoot him to death, not without consequences, except maybe in Florida. Take your political agenda somewhere else asshole. |
|
#3
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
A call for tourists to avoid Florida...
On 4/2/12 7:56 AM, BAR wrote:
In article4qWdnVzZaqnuEuTSnZ2dnUVZ_oydnZ2d@earthlink .com, dump-on- says... On 4/2/12 7:26 AM, BAR wrote: In , lid says... On 4/1/2012 5:50 PM, JustWait wrote: On 4/1/2012 4:45 PM, thumper wrote: On 3/31/2012 8:28 AM, BAR wrote: The right to keep and bear arms has implicit within it the abiltiy to defend ones self from aggressors. Otherwise, why would there be a 2nd amendment? It apparently had more to do with "a well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state" than individual self defense. "It apparently"? LOL, another one who makes it up as he goes along. It is apparent. You have a problem with a literal interpretation of the second amendment? It doesn't mention individual self defense, I'm not making that up. "..., the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." Do you understand the meaning of "shall" and the meaning of "not". Do you understand that the amendment mentions "State" and "people" explicitly. The clause "the right of the people to keep and bear arms" has a specific and direct meaning. If it had been a right granted only to the States then they would not have added the second clause, explicitly identifying the people. Whatever it means, it surely doesn't mean you can chase down a kid who is carrying an iced tea and a bag of candy and shoot him to death, not without consequences, except maybe in Florida. Take your political agenda somewhere else asshole. Just count me among the group of everyone who doesn't take you or your demands seriously, moron. |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| crazy tourists | General | |||
| Avoid these compasses | ASA | |||
| Tourists | ASA | |||
| Marketing phrases to avoid.... | General | |||
| Another example to avoid following: | General | |||
![X ` Man[_3_] is offline](https://www.boatbanter.com/images/SultanThemeVB3R/statusicon/user_offline.gif)
Hybrid Mode
