Isn't it the likes of the Bush government that the FF were warning against? So it's quite interesting that it's overwhelmingly the people who support gun ownership --on the basis of protecting against tyranny-- who are supporting the tyrannical government. Was it Jefferson who warned that a democracy cannot work without an educated populace? Ursula (just back from Mexico, so not caught up on this or any other thread)
Paul Stone wrote:
Lawrence: Since gun control advocates have attempted to institute legislation favoring their position, this matter has been hotly debated in congress from time to time, but the fact that the founding fathers, the originators of the Second Amendment meant a certain thing by it weighs heavily against gun control and gun control makes little headway. The above is an analysis from a congressional subcommittee on gun control. It is especially interesting because in it one can find a history of the thinking that led up to the Second Amendment.The Second Amendment seems to be as outdated and as relevant as the "rules" in The Bible against eating certain things or menstruating women attending church. The liklihood that the reason that you need a gun is to form an armed militia against a tyrannical government is very low. It's interesting that the answer to "why do you have a gun?" and "why should you be allowed to have a gun?" are very different. The answer to the first is so you can shoot people if they "get too close" or try to take your stuff. The answer to the second is because your fore-fathers lived in a renegade society where you needed to be able to form militias against certain other factions... and now you extend it to the ludicrous argument: so you can shoot _government_ people if they try to take your stuff.paul
------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
