|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
ME: Second Amendment deserves a closer look
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Most of the communications I receive press their message in the third and fourth phrases and ignore the first two phrases. This, to me, is a totally biased viewpoint and, in my estimation, calls for some kind of action, possibly another amendment. In any event, it should at least give us the freedom to regulate gun ownership in whatever manner is deemed necessary. |
| Comment by:
teebonicus
(6/27/2015)
|
No comments section for that article, so....
First, the 2A has only two clauses and one comma. That is the version submitted for ratification, and is in fact the version that was ratified.
That said, the opening phrase is a dependent clause. The declaration of the right is an independent clause. Dependent clauses "depend" on independent clauses for their context, not the reverse, hence; "dependent clauses".
DUH.
As well, the 2A is a guarantee, not a right-generator.
"The right there specified is that of 'bearing arms for a lawful purpose.' This is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence." - U S v. CRUIKSHANK, 92 U.S. 542 (1875) 92 U.S. 542
Wadda dimwit.
|
| Comment by:
jac
(6/28/2015)
|
| These people think they know it all. They don't care about facts. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| I do believe that where there is a choice only between cowardice and violence, I would advise violence. Thus when my eldest son asked me what he should have done had he been present when I was almost fatally assaulted in 1908 [by an Indian extremist opposed to Gandhi's agreement with Smuts], whether he should have run away and seen me killed or whether he should have used his physical force which he could and wanted to use, and defend me, I told him it was his duty to defend me even by using violence. Hence it was that I took part in the Boer War, the so-called Zulu Rebellion and [World War I]. Hence also do I advocate training in arms for those who believe in the method of violence. I would rather have India resort to arms in order to defend her honor than that she should in a cowardly manner become or remain a helpless witness to her own dishonor. — Mohandas K. Gandhi, Young India, August 11, 1920 from Fischer, Louis ed.,The Essential Gandhi, 1962 |
|
|
