SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Clinton's Scandals: Is this corruption the worst ever?
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: DMaA who wrote (696)8/6/1998 5:12:00 PM
From: The Philosopher  Read Replies (1) of 13994
 
One thing has always bothered me about 2nd amendment supporters. The 2nd amendment makes no limitations on the definition of "arms." One interpretation is that it covers any arms in existence at the time the Amendment was written, in which case I'm all for it. You can have all the musket loaders you want. The other interpretation is that it applies also to arms unknown at the time it was written but developed since. In that case, does the amendment allow me to have my own atomic bomb, my own fully equipped combat jets, my own M-1 Abrams Tank, my own flamethrowers, in my suburban house? If not, why not? But the NRA always folds on this and admits that the feds can control atomic weapons, machine guns, and other fully military arms (which are just the weapons a citizen militia would need to beat back government oppression). How can the NRA argue that the 2nd amendment protects the right to bear semi-automatic weapons but not the right to bear frag grenades and atom bombs???
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News