From: marcel@hpindvm.cupnews0 (Marcel Burlet)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: democratic platform
Date: 29 Jul 92 23:38:30 GMT
	<1992Jul29.220230.1941@PacBell.COM>
Organization: HP Termio


In article <1992Jul29.220230.1941@PacBell.COM> rjwill6@PacBell.COM (Rod Williams) writes:

>rjwill6@PacBell.COM (Rod Williams)
>> "dal" <p00056@mail.psi.net> writes:
>>> kenk@sdc.com (Ken Konecki) writes:

>>>Poppycock.  The 2nd amendment was never intended to allow private citizens
>>>to "keep and bear arms".  If it had, there would have been wording such as
>>>"the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed".
>>
>>Excuse me .... Why dont you get stuffed? Why is it that most of the 
>>signers of the Bill of Rights have written about the right to bear arms
>>as a personal right? In what flim flam reality do you exist? The domain of
>>our Bill of Rights is entirely and utterly the province of the individual.
>>Because of sickening rationalizations like yours, our lives are slowly being
>>dictated, decided and determined by the few and not the will of the individual. 
>>The hell with the courts, the law, idiot politicians and especially you...
>>Ill will defend my right to exist as a free man, and not a slave to ignorance.
>>
>>We are men, not chattel for you amusement.

>Oh give me a fucking break.  As if the Founding Fathers knew
>anything about *six-guns*, much less Uzis and rocket-launchers
>and personal nuclear devices.  

Did our Founding Fathers know about high speed printing presses, or
radio, or TV?  Do these things invalidate the 1st amendment? 

But, our Founding Fathers did know about fully automatic machine guns
(presented before the British Royal Society about 1680(?)), revolvers
(generally 6 chambers and 6 barrels, but a nit) and about rockets
(used extensively in the Napoleonic wars).

Weapons of mass distruction were not known about, but these are not at
issue here. What the Founding Fathers were talking about were militia
weapons: you carry them with you into war; in a militia, you provide
them yourself. Going to war with a personal nuke on your back is a bit
much to ask.

>				To claim that their 1789 view of
>"arms" and "people" have any conceivable relevance to the social
>conditions we live in, and the weapons of mass destruction that
>are tearing our society apart today is truly to live in a "flim
>flam reality".

So, do you also believe that their 1789 view of privacy, or illegal
search, or right to a jury trial have any conceivable relevance to the
social conditions we live in?  Do you think that it would be OK to
house soldiers, without compensation, in your residence?  Would you
want to be compelled to testify in your own defence?

All of these are other amendments to the constituion would be invalid,
using your reasoning.

If you'd like to blow away _all_ of the amendments, and the rest of
the Constituion, do it for yourself.  I don't want to, and I don't
want _you_ to give away _my_ rights.

Look, the Constituion didn't grant any rights to "the People". It
limited the rights of the government.  In 1789, our Founding Fathers
were afraid of a government that was insensitive to the wants and
needs of the governed.  They had just gotten through with fighting a
war about that.

They also believed that citizens could have arms.  It is _the_
differentiatior between freemen and slaves, and has been since ancient
Greek times.


>			The tragedy is that your obsessive ranting is
>actually taken seriously by our idiot lawmakers.

The tragedy is that your obsessive ranting is seriously spouted by
idiot lawmakers.  

>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
>rod williams -=- pacific bell -=- san francisco -=- rjwill6@pacbell.com
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------


--
**************************************************************************
* Marcel Burlet	            | {ucbvax,hplabs}!hpda!hpindlm!marcel [UUCP] *
* Information Net. Div(IND) | marcel%hpda@hplabs.HP.COM       [INTERNET] *
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
 in the real world."   -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden
**************************************************************************
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections