[lit-ideas] Re: Gun control
- From: "Lawrence Helm"<lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 20:52:26 +0000
The Supreme Court doesn't get to make laws and it doesn't get to take away
rights. Being in the minority as you Leftists are, I know you depend on the
Supreme Court to accomplish the goals you can't accomplish through legislation,
but I don't think you'll be able to cancel the Second Amendment.
Weren't you among those who objected to the FBI and CIA tapping messages going
from and to terrorist organizations? Didn't you complain about the "right to
privacy" being infringed. Didn't you complain that terrorists at Guantanamo
deserved all the rights of the signers of the Geneva convention? No? Sorry,
my mistake.
The nature of the arms we have a right to bear has been discussed at length.
No one is suggesting that we individually own more weapons than an ordinary
private: handguns and rifles are enough to keep the normal citizen happy.
The right to bear arms doesn't at present mean that it is mandatory to bear
arms. You don't have to if you don't want to. On the other hand, pacifists
don't have the right to impose their Lemming-like philosophy on the rest of us
either.
And I guess you haven't been paying attention to Iraq. If a relatively small
number of insurgents in Iraq can oppose a nation with a $500 billion dollar
military budget; what makes you think some irate American citizens who object
to the imposition of a tyranny couldn't do as well?
Lawrence
------------Original Message------------
From: "Mike Geary" <atlas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Thu, Apr-19-2007 1:10 PM
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Gun control
LH:
>>You want to invest terrorists with rights they don't deserve and take away
>>from Americans rights they do deserve.<<
I do? I didn't realize that.
>> Owning guns is a Second Amendment right.<<
Ah ha! I see what you're getting at. You'll have to forgive me. I hadn't
known that had been decided by the Supreme Court.
>>You would achieve, if you could create such a repressive society capable of
>>taking away everyone's gun, a tyrannical dictatorship worse than what the
>>founding fathers attempted to guard against with their Second Amendment
>>stipulation.<<
Oh, I hadn't realize that either. So I guess it's incumbent upon us all to own
shoulder-fired anti-aircraft rocket launchers to discourage tyrannical
dictatorship. Talk about your tyrannical dictatorship -- how about all those
vaccinations the government requires of usl? And how about those food
processors having to submit to Federal food handling laws -- is there no end to
government interference in our desire to just be ourselves? Hey, Government, I
have a Constitutional right to own nuclear weapons, so go fuck yourself.
Nuclear weapons are just tools, after all.
>>Part of the reason we own guns is to be able to prevent such a tyrannical
>>takeover.
Yes, I see now. Well, good luck with that. Our military budget is $500
billion dollars, this year. I hope you've a lot of guns and ammo laid by.
Mike Geary
conceding to the wisdom of gun lovers everwhere
Other related posts:
