LOL!!! That looks like a website to explore.
Quote:A Second Amendment Analogue
"A well-educated electorate being necessary to the preservation of a free society, the right of the people to read and compose books shall not be infringed."
Obviously this does not mean that only well-educated voters have the right to read or write books. Nor does it mean that the right to read books of one's choosing can be restricted to only those subjects which lead to a well-educated electorate.
The purpose of this provision is: although not everyone may end up being well-educated, enough people will become well-educated to preserve a free society.
Nor can it be construed to deny one's pre-existing right to read books if there are not enough well-educated people to be found. The right to read books of one's choosing is not granted by the above statement. The rationale given is only one reason for not abridging that right, there are others as well.
Similarly the Second Amendment states, the people from whom a necessary and well-regulated militia will be composed, shall not have their right to keep and bear arms infringed.
It was the Founders' desire "that every man be armed" such that from the "whole body of the people" (militia) a sufficient number would serve in the well-regulated militia.
"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 the people are armed and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretence, raised in the United States."
--- Noah Webster of Pennsylvania, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution, Philadelphia, 1787
Quote:After James Madison's Bill of Rights was submitted to Congress, Tench Coxe (see also: Tench Coxe and the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, 1787-1823) published his "Remarks on the First Part of the Amendments to the Federal Constitution," in the Federal Gazette, June 18, 1789 He asserts that it's the people (as individuals) with arms, who serve as the ultimate check on government:
As civil rulers, not having their duty to the people duly before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as the military forces which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow-citizens, the people are confirmed by the next article in their right to keep and bear their private arms.
"Coxe's defense of the amendments was widely reprinted. A search of the literature of the time reveals that no writer disputed or contradicted Coxe's analysis that what became the Second Amendment protected the right of the people to keep and bear "their private arms." The only dispute was over whether a bill of rights was even necessary to protect such fundamental rights." (Halbrook, Stephen P. "The Right of the People or the Power of the State Bearing Arms, Arming Militias, and the Second Amendment". Originally published as 26 Val. U. L.Rev. 131-207, 1991).
Earlier, in The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788, while the states were considering ratification of the Constitution, Tench Coxe wrote:
Who are the militia? are they not ourselves. Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American...The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.
Here's a nice website called
Guncite.com that explains all about the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution. It's not limited to only the narrow aspect of what the militia was designed to be, but discusses every part of the Second Amendment, including the original intent and purpose, court cases, and fallacies.
Finally, you can ignore statistics if you want to, but it's generally not a good idea. As Robert Heinlein wrote:
Quote:What are the facts? Again and again and again --- what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what "the stars foretell", avoid opinion, Care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable "verdict of history" --- what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always in to an unknown future; facts are your only chance. Get the facts!
-- Lazarus Long
Tarantulas wrote:Here's a nice website called
Guncite.com that explains all about the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution. It's not limited to only the narrow aspect of what the militia was designed to be, but discusses every part of the Second Amendment, including the original intent and purpose, court cases, and fallacies.
Yes, guncite seems to be experts in constitutional law
Peace through superior firepower.
Hey, do they sell squirtguns or other toy guns in Oz?
I was just at a conference here in Silicon Valley where the speaker pulled out a laser pointer. All the Austrailians ran out of the room and were later found hiding under a table in the lobby.
They weren't hiding: they were looking for rocks to stone you.
Well I was at a conference and the guy did have a laser pointer and all I could think about was "Man, if there were any Aussies here, they'd be diving for cover right about now."
Why do you wish violence upon me? I've never advocated such a sentence even for my worst online or in person enemies. Dude, I hunt, fish, and grow a good portion of my own food. And I live in an urban area. Anyone who hasn't had their rights taken away can do this too.
cjhsa wrote:Well I was at a conference and the guy did have a laser pointer and all I could think about was "Man, if there were any Aussies here, they'd be diving for cover right about now."
Well, since cjhsa wrote:
All the Austrailians ran out of the room and were later found hiding under a table in the lobby.
... I just thought, this was what the Australians (I'm neither from there nor do I wish to do any violence against you!) wanted to do.
Defend your right to keep and arm bears.
Our bears are not bears, but arboreal marsupials! And they have good natural armament - claws, teeth, and piss!
Actually. as a gun owner, I'm glad the more rabid anti-gun types tend not to be armed. Guns don't kill people, caereless, irresponisible, unqualified idiots with guns kill people. My take isn't real popular among the shoot'em up crowd, but personally, I find it absurd that a certain level of competency must be certificated before one may operate a motor vehicle, or even some communications devices, while by-and-large almost anyone may obtain and use a firearm without being required to produce much more than the money necessary to complete the transaction. I think there should be three simple gun laws:
1) Be found in possession of a firearm without a firearm owner's license, certifying one at least knows how to handle firearms safely and responsibly, lose the firearm ... and the right to obtain the license to possess a firearm for a long time.
2) Be found to be in possession of a firearm while in the act of committing any violent or other serious crime, go to jail for a long time.
3) Display, discharge, or otherwise employ a firearm as adjunct to the commission of a crime, go to jail for life.
I'll have to disagree on #1, the other two are already law. I do think people should be trained in proper use and safety before being able to purchase though. But what if someone gives you a gun as a gift, or you inherit some?
I'm a gun nut who thinks gun control is a refuge of sanity.
When I was 16, for example, my Dad gave me a Browning Sweet 16 shotgun for Christmas. I had a hunters safety certificate because I had gone deer hunting with him before, using a borrowed rifle.
Before that .16 however, I had a Crosman pellet/bb gun for years, long before I had any outside safety training, only what my Dad had taught me (parents are the best teacher you can have).
I still have that Sweet 16 by the way. Lightweight and powerful, it kicks like a mule. A magnum cartridge will literally put a dent in your shoulder.
i'm proficient in the use of a number of firearms and weapons in general. have not owned a firearm for many years though, and don't plan to any time soon.
this thread "aussies, hide your steak knives" must be a pre-april fools idea. i cannot believe that aussies have steak knives or that they would know what to do with them if they did. i believe that steaks in oz are simply picked up with both hands and gnawed on.
g'day
For anyone that is interested there is a useful site
here that deals with the "statistics" presented by John Lott in the opening post. Has some good links too.
You see, some find it more than peculiar funnny, when you must be 21 to drink alcohol legally, but use a weapon younger than 16. (Must be 18 or 21 in Europe before getting weapon licences in Europe.)
<shaking head in disbelief> All the issues you could get passionate about! ... Amazing that owning & using guns should be so high on anyone's list. Extraordinary, really. I honestly can't get it.
