What you have to remember is that shooting bullets out of a gun is simply a technological advancement over throwing rocks at each other. Or to put it another way, if we actually did ban the sale of firearms to the public it would be a moot act because we’d simply find another way to off our fellow man.
Berke, may I respectfully urge you to read the 2nd Amendment of the Bill of Rights. Mrs, Dinklewat has a constitutional right to keep and bear arms. Just like you have the constitutional right to publish anything you want. You are obviously very intelligent, why the difficulty in in processing this. See Heller.
Jerry
Bill, thank you for your comment. You voiced the common liberal argument anti 2nd A. You must read Heller. US Supreme Court decision. By a 9-0 vote- unanimous- including liberals Stevens, Ginsburg, Souter and Breyer the law of the is now the clause which liberals have read to approve of only a collective right to bear arms is not correct. All Justices now agree that we have an individual right to keep and bear arms. It is the law of the land and will not be reversed again it was 9-0. So as a man of honor for the rest of your life you must abandon that lost argument. We each as individuals have the right to keep and bear arms.
When the Constitution was written anyone willing & able to use firearms was considered part of the militia. When street-gangs claim to be defending their turf it affirms their membership in the militia. Thus any gang crime should be prosecuted by court martial.
When the Constitution was written anyone willing & able to use firearms was considered part of the militia. When street-gangs claim to be defending their turf it affirms their membership in the militia. Thus any gang crime should be prosecuted by court martial.”
This would only be proper if the militia had been called into military duty by a properly authorized person, such as the County Sheriff or State Governor.
Otherwise, rather than a court martial, a militia court is the proper venue.
Militia Court? Most people in the US call it “trial by Jury” not realizing that jury duty is a function of the militia, and the penalties for failing to serve on a jury when called are based on the laws concerning failure to respond when the militia is called out.
landshark67 about 15 years ago
This just shows you how little things really change.
ejcapulet about 15 years ago
Dude - she’s probably armed!
StrangeTikiGod about 15 years ago
He’s throttling her firmly enough that she’ll black out before she can get the gun from her handbag.
Sisyphos about 15 years ago
Tsk, tsk! Is that any way to express your anti-gun sentiments? –And who (or what) is next (drat that overly-quick Milo!)?
Ray_C about 15 years ago
Guns don’t strangle people. People strangle people.
jrbj about 15 years ago
What you have to remember is that shooting bullets out of a gun is simply a technological advancement over throwing rocks at each other. Or to put it another way, if we actually did ban the sale of firearms to the public it would be a moot act because we’d simply find another way to off our fellow man.
DesultoryPhillipic about 15 years ago
“They” don’t care what you kill each other with so long as you aren’t able to kill them with it.
Radical-Knight about 15 years ago
Wow, This is a tuff crowd! LOL!!!
GNWachs about 15 years ago
Berke, may I respectfully urge you to read the 2nd Amendment of the Bill of Rights. Mrs, Dinklewat has a constitutional right to keep and bear arms. Just like you have the constitutional right to publish anything you want. You are obviously very intelligent, why the difficulty in in processing this. See Heller. Jerry
temblor Premium Member about 15 years ago
Which says “In order to maintain a well ordered militia…” How many handgun owners are in the militia?
GNWachs about 15 years ago
Bill, thank you for your comment. You voiced the common liberal argument anti 2nd A. You must read Heller. US Supreme Court decision. By a 9-0 vote- unanimous- including liberals Stevens, Ginsburg, Souter and Breyer the law of the is now the clause which liberals have read to approve of only a collective right to bear arms is not correct. All Justices now agree that we have an individual right to keep and bear arms. It is the law of the land and will not be reversed again it was 9-0. So as a man of honor for the rest of your life you must abandon that lost argument. We each as individuals have the right to keep and bear arms.
ChukLitl Premium Member about 15 years ago
When the Constitution was written anyone willing & able to use firearms was considered part of the militia. When street-gangs claim to be defending their turf it affirms their membership in the militia. Thus any gang crime should be prosecuted by court martial.
Miserichord about 15 years ago
“ChukLitlPro says:
When the Constitution was written anyone willing & able to use firearms was considered part of the militia. When street-gangs claim to be defending their turf it affirms their membership in the militia. Thus any gang crime should be prosecuted by court martial.”
This would only be proper if the militia had been called into military duty by a properly authorized person, such as the County Sheriff or State Governor. Otherwise, rather than a court martial, a militia court is the proper venue.
Militia Court? Most people in the US call it “trial by Jury” not realizing that jury duty is a function of the militia, and the penalties for failing to serve on a jury when called are based on the laws concerning failure to respond when the militia is called out.