Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" |
Date: |
Thu, 24 Oct 2002 01:17:49 +0100 |
Reply-To: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
8bit |
In-Reply-To: |
<F841720D906AD61186DB0002A53FA342205E3A@MCDC-ATL-1> |
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Sender: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
On Wednesday 23 Oct 2002 6:09 pm, you wrote:
> You know the founding fathers had a reason for the firearms clause in the
> 2nd amendment. It was not to protect the rights of people to have a gun to
> hunt, it was not even to protect the right to have a gun to protect
> yourself from criminals (even though these are legitimate uses for guns) it
> was put that so that the populance would have guns to protect themselves
> from,,,, GOVERNMENT.... OUR FOUNDING FATHERS assumed that a well armed
> populance would overthrow a government that got too oppressive.
>
> Amazing what you learen reading the writing of the founders, is it any
> surprize that an opressive government either limits what you can read or in
> our case see to it that most people do not learn to read.
>
I'd have thought universal suffrage was the best defense against oppressive
government. Arming the populace seems to me to be an excellent recipe to
empower extremist groups. I shan't even get onto the negative aspects of
having a written constitution in the first place. ;-)
Cheers
Deri
|
|
|