Politics for Pros- moderated Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Sig who wrote (94237)	1/8/2005 12:23:42 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) of 793757

I see no problem with possessing a small cannon... I don't see a problem with that either. At least it's debatable. The question for me is not whether it's a good thing or a bad thing for someone to have a cannon on the lawn. Legislatures can debate such things and make a call one way or the other. The question is whether or not the Constitution gives people an absolute right to do that or not. I am not anti-gun. What I argue against is the notion that there's a Constitutional right to bear arms outside the framework of a militia. One side of the argument thinks it has a trump card and doesn't need to analyze and negotiate the advantages and disadvantages of an armed public. This produces stalemate and hostility, which are nonconstructive. Whether the net result is more guns or fewer guns, I'd like to see an honest debate of the question.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next