"The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes..." - US Supreme Court, June 2008.
End of ball game
On Friday, April 13, 2012 11:43:57 AM UTC-4, MJ wrote:
--
The simple English grammar of Amendment II does not support the claimed, absurd meaning cited in your article.
Regard$,
--MJ
Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword because the whole body of people are armed and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States ... -- Noah Webster
The modern drive against gun control started with an expansive
interpretation of the Second Amendment as bestowing an absolute,
individual right to �keep� and �bear� arms, rather than a societal
right based on the need for a �well-regulated militia.�
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
No comments:
Post a Comment