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 : Impeach George W. Bush -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TigerPaw who wrote (15868)	10/22/2002 12:08:21 AM
From: ManyMoose	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93284

I expect the founding fathers had to put that clause in the Second Amendment to pacify the gun-grabbers of the day. Since it has no modifying effect, it is otherwise completely superfluous. Tiger, your faith in the police and national guard reminds me of that fella in Tienamin Square. That's you and me if we lose the right to keep and bear arms. The police and national guard have a tank, but we don't. How can I put it any more simply so you'll understand?

To: TigerPaw who wrote (15868)	10/22/2002 1:08:30 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93284

Your explanation of the second amendment seems to imply that the founding fathers inserted language about militas only because they had excess ink to use up, or some other inocuous reason, and not that they actually meant what they wrote. They did mean what they wrote. What they didn't right was that the right was the right of the militia. The 1st clause was apparently inserted as rhetorical support for the 2nd. "I wonder if you expect us to come to your aid" No, that's what we have police and national guard for And I'm sure they can always be there on time... Tim