tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post4933210305983815700..comments2024-03-06T06:34:42.881-05:00Comments on EconoSpeak: To Hell With The Second Amendment And At Least Reinstate 1994 Ban on Assault Weapons SalesUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post-53649412916045152342012-12-17T17:50:28.792-05:002012-12-17T17:50:28.792-05:00And lead into Pa. by Alexander Hamilton, on horseb...And lead into Pa. by Alexander Hamilton, on horseback. He was said to be quite the dashing figure and a pretty good military leader. So maybe it should be required to be on a horse if one wants to pack a gun.Jackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12971442888151627894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post-40583917098786838552012-12-17T16:10:53.076-05:002012-12-17T16:10:53.076-05:00I agree, Jack. The SCOTUS completely misses the o...I agree, Jack. The SCOTUS completely misses the original context of the 2nd Amendment, which was that it constituted our national security policy. We had no standing army. The militia was it, to be called upon in times of needing a national defense. Or, much to the annoyance of tea partying tax protestors, to put down a violent tax protest such as the Whiskey Rebellion, which was put down by a militia that President George Washington put together.<br />rosserjb@jmu.eduhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09300046915843554101noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post-70137678375980882772012-12-17T12:18:51.989-05:002012-12-17T12:18:51.989-05:00And note also that the wording addresses only &quo...And note also that the wording addresses only "the right of the people to keep and bear arms." It says nothing about the right to sell or to own such weapons. Nor, for that matter, does it address what kinds of weapons fall under the rubric of Arms. Only the small minds of Scalia et al could interpret that one sentence into a death sentence for so many innocent victims. Jackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12971442888151627894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post-62446923093348744102012-12-17T01:35:04.531-05:002012-12-17T01:35:04.531-05:00Barkley
It's not the Second Amendment that is ...Barkley<br />It's not the Second Amendment that is a mistake. It's the intentional misinterpretation of that very simple directive by an ideologically biased Supreme Court that is the mistake. Any court that can define a corporation as having the rights of an individual citizen is playing fast and loose with reality. Is there any real person that is required to be chartered by the government in order to exist? <br /><br />"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."<br />One sentence in which the words individual and citizen doesn't even appear. Bearing of arms is the right of "the people" and that term has always been used as a reference to the actions and/or responsibilities of the nation, not its individual citizens. Jackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12971442888151627894noreply@blogger.com