Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
US Senator Coburn (R-OK) Introduces Gun Control of His Own (not kidding!!!)
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Dave70968" data-source="post: 2175630" data-attributes="member: 13624"><p>Y'know, if you're going to talk about the Constitution, you really ought to <em>read</em> the thing.</p><p></p><p>1) If the Constitution is a living document, then Article V is its beating heart. You <em>do</em> know Article V, don't you? The Framers knew that it would have to adapt to the times, so they gave us specific procedures to do so. Those procedures do <em>not</em> include the words "say things are different now, so it doesn't mean what it used to."</p><p></p><p>2) The Framers meant a much more expansive view of the right than you recognize. In fact, their interpretation allowed for private ownership of cannon, and even warships. The proof is right there in the document itself: Article I, Section 8 authorizes Congress to issue letters of marque and reprisal. That would be a pointless thing to do if there weren't privateers to whom such letters could have been issued, now wouldn't it?</p><p></p><p>3) Yes, actually, I do believe that anybody who's not serving a lawfully-imposed sentence should be free to keep firearms. Rob a bank? Go to prison. Stay there. But when he's released, he's paid his debt to society; he's a free man. Still think he's a danger? Then keep him locked up. Free men ought to be <em>free</em>.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Dave70968, post: 2175630, member: 13624"] Y'know, if you're going to talk about the Constitution, you really ought to [I]read[/I] the thing. 1) If the Constitution is a living document, then Article V is its beating heart. You [I]do[/I] know Article V, don't you? The Framers knew that it would have to adapt to the times, so they gave us specific procedures to do so. Those procedures do [I]not[/I] include the words "say things are different now, so it doesn't mean what it used to." 2) The Framers meant a much more expansive view of the right than you recognize. In fact, their interpretation allowed for private ownership of cannon, and even warships. The proof is right there in the document itself: Article I, Section 8 authorizes Congress to issue letters of marque and reprisal. That would be a pointless thing to do if there weren't privateers to whom such letters could have been issued, now wouldn't it? 3) Yes, actually, I do believe that anybody who's not serving a lawfully-imposed sentence should be free to keep firearms. Rob a bank? Go to prison. Stay there. But when he's released, he's paid his debt to society; he's a free man. Still think he's a danger? Then keep him locked up. Free men ought to be [I]free[/I]. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
US Senator Coburn (R-OK) Introduces Gun Control of His Own (not kidding!!!)
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom