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: TimF who wrote (3966)	8/11/2000 1:19:19 PM
From: theturboe	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 13060

Do you think it is cruel and unreasonable punishment to subject non-violent prisoners to prison rape and destroyment of their family? spr.org

To: TimF who wrote (3966)	8/11/2000 6:18:59 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 13060

Okay, let's assume you're right. A question: What is the definition of arms? Only those in existence at the time the Constitution was written? Or all and any arms? If the former, fine. You can have black power muzzle loaders, bows and arrows, etc. But nothing not available in 1787. If the latter, and you truly believe that the right to bear arms cannot be infringed, then you must believe that I should be permitted to keep and bear fully automatic weapons. That a person living next to an airport should be permitted to keep and bear stinger missiles. That people should be able to carry guns openly on airplanes. (Our current restrictions are definitely an infringement on the right to bear arms.) Heck, I should be alowed to keep nuclear weapons in my basement. Right?