Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : Libertarian Discussion Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: chalu2 who wrote (3665)	5/15/2000 12:54:00 AM
From: ManyMoose	Respond to of 13062

<<ownership with reasonable restrictions (to prevent arms falling into the hands of felons, etc.) would carry the day.>> I'm sorry, but you must realize that "felons, etc." will have their weapons, and any restrictions you promote will impinge only on the law-abiding. That's the simple truth, and you know it.

To: chalu2 who wrote (3665)	5/15/2000 1:04:00 AM
From: Gordon A. Langston	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13062

I'll meet your Garman and raise you a grammarian. shadeslanding.com I don't think you will find any Supreme Court discussion in this manner. I would be curious if you find a case. It is interesting that you seem to feel that this should be decided in a plebiscite. We live in a republic and nowhere in the Constitution is the word democracy mentioned and nowhere in the Bill of Rights is free speech or the right to bear arms referred to as "granted", quite the contrary, they are protected and guaranteed, a birthright. I find it curious that a tax on voting was less a crime against the citizen than a tax on firearms. You have not done much research if you think the founding fathers did not believe citizens might someday have to defend themselves against tyranny. We did have a Civil War, which you may try to equivocate as being a war about slavery or an illegal secession but is really little removed from the original Revolution. Message 13703082

To: chalu2 who wrote (3665)	5/15/2000 9:18:00 AM
From: The Street	Respond to of 13062

You "claim" to be a vampire, er attorney. So, you understand the simple legal dcotrine of Original Intent? OK, so here are some state constitutions, 2 for the states I have lived in, 1 for your state: Florida STATE CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISION: "(a) The right of the people to keep and bear arms in defense of themselves and of the lawful authority of the state shall not be infringed, except that the manner of bearing arms may be regulated by law. (b) There shall be a mandatory period of three days, excluding weekends and legal holidays, between the purchase and delivery at retail of any handgun. For the purposes of this section, "purchase" means the transfer of money or other valuable consideration to the retailer, and "handgun" means a firearm capable of being carried and used by one hand, such as a pistol or revolver. Holders of a concealed weapon permit as prescribed in Florida law shall not be subject to the provisions of this paragraph. (c) [A]nyone violating the provisions of subsection (b) shall be guilty of a felony. (d) This restriction shall not apply to a trade in of another handgun." Article 1, Section 8. Indiana STATE CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISION: "The people shall have a right to bear arms, for the defense of themselves and the State." Article 1 Section 32 New York State Constitutional Provision: None. However, Section 4 of the New York Civil Rights Law provides: "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms cannot be infringed.''