American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs 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 : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (28834)	7/3/2008 2:40:30 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) of 71588

How could you possibly know that (without yet having bothered to actually READ the written legislative history of the Congressional debate)? How do you know I haven't read it? Whether I have or not, my statement wasn't about the legislative history itself, but about the claims being made about it. I read the claims in your post. Maybe there is something in the history that was not referenced in the claims you quoted. I'm talking about the claims. If there is some other evidence beyond that, than either post it, or its not that relevant to the current conversation. Most especially --- when the House puts in CLEAR LANGUAGE laying out an INDIVIDUAL'S RIGHT to bear arms... and the Senate refuses to go along, and strikes the language, and the House is then forced to accept the Senate's language That the main claim, in question (although not the only one). It indicates just about nothing. It doesn't indicate the reason for supporting different wording, only that two different groups liked two different ways of wording the amendment.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next