@izzythepush,
izzythepush wrote:Dave, Bill talks about the rights of child porographers with the same passion and enthusiasm
you write about gun ownership.
Well, Izzy, u see,
BOTH concepts address political freedom of the Individual citizen,
i.e. the
RIGHTS of the Individual citizen are the
LIMITS on the powers of government.
In
BOTH cases, legislation has arisen from
USURPATION of power, in violation of the Constitution.
In America ". . . the Land of the Free . . . " the Supreme Law of the Land
sets forth that government has
NO power other than what has been granted to it,
and for sure the Founders never gave it the power to stop people from making images
(except qua the "counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States").
See Amendments 9 & 10 US Constitution
There have been many things whereof I have little knowledge nor interest.
Among them is art.
I simply never cared much about it (including painting, sculpture & fotografy),
but I am peripherally aware that for centuries it has included
paintings and sculptures of women and children who have been
in many different states of dress. The Victorian Era is known for being prudish,
but in contrast, female breasts and male genitalia have been
carved in stone or painted in oil in respected, valuable art.
(I might be mistaken, out of ignorance of art, but I think that includes all ages.)
Around the turn of the 20th Century, it was a scandal to see a woman's ankle
revealed by her lifting her dress in mounting or leaving a public streetcar.
Now, barefooted women r shown on daytime TV all the way up to their hips
(wearing bathing suits) and no one cares. ( Indeed, in the 1940s & 1950s,
representations of racial intermarriage shown on TV
now woud have
nationwide
been deemed to be indecent, in the extreme! All hell woud have broken loose. )
I wish to compare changes in the consensus qua "common decency"
to changes in the weather, and to assert that it is very poor judgment
to ruin anyone 's life by incarceration because of his or her sentiments on that point.
It is
EVEN WORSE to thow our safeguards of personal freedom
in the garbage by giving government a free pass on
USURPING POWER.
If the precedent is established (I believe that it
IS) that government can freely usurp power
when supported by popular consensus (did Hitler have a popular consensus, Sieg Heil ??),
then
NONE of our rights,
none of our freedom is safe.
izzythepush wrote:It's inconceivable to think that you have never fired a gun. I don't have to say any more.
Well, it took me 8 years to get around to
DOING it.
Perhaps u 'll be surprized to learn that there is a significant proportion
of the NRA membership (who show up at meetings) for whom the right to KABA
is
purely theoretical; i.e., thay r of little avail,
if someone wants advice on the virtues of revolvers v. automatics
or the most significant elements of successful
STOPPING POWER.
My knowledge on this point is empirical (from conversing with them at NRA meetings).
David
