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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: haqihana who wrote (94313)	1/8/2005 4:58:39 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793750

The bearing of arms is not moot. If you are in your home, and it is attacked by robbers, maniacs, drug addicts, or any one else, neither the "so called" militias, or even the cops, are going to get there in time to protect you and your family. I am not questioning that one might want to have arms in the home for such a purpose or that they should be permitted. I think that people should be able to reasonably protect themselves from the bad guys. The right to bear arms is still in the Constitution, and no one has ever attempted to amend it. That makes it LEGAL!. But I think you are very mistaken if you think that the second amendment gives you that right. It's legal in most places because few jurisdictions have made it illegal. If you had ever been in a dangerous situation with no weapon, and limited time to contact the authorities, you would be singing a different tune. I think that you are also mistaking my tune.