Posted on 01/13/2013 6:59:56 AM PST by Kaslin
That's surprising to me. In my old Merriam Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, Tenth Edition, c/r 1994 it says under Bear\bear-ing - "bear arms 1 : to carry or possess arms 2 : to serve as a soldier".
We're trying to pick fly shit out of the pepper here, KK. The 2A is clear as a bell. IMO, 0bama, BiteMe and their gang are going nowhere with their gun grabbing wet dream.
Penn and Teller did an episode of their Showtime “Bullshit” Show on the Second Amendment.
They even explained how the sentence structure and how the Amendment was worded did NOT mean that The People had to be part of an organized Militia, which is how Liberals argue against Individual Gun Ownership.
Link below to a small clip, and there is a bit of graphic language, which I always expect from Penn.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQkM2qhJjkw
Outstanding! I nominate Penn for SecDef and Teller for CIA Dir.
“That’s surprising to me.”
Well, it is the 1828 edition of Webster’s we were using. I started with that one for this back in post 14. As I wrote, Websters 1828 is the closest Ive found to the time of the Founders.
“The 2A is clear as a bell.”
That doesn’t seem to be true for everyone, so perhaps you should explain it.
Consider as rights “the right to keep and bear arms” in comparison with “the right to vote”. Same wording. Yet everyone knows “the right to vote” is not all inclusive. A citizen can not vote every time a vote is held. A citizen can not vote in a vote held in the next state over, in a state in which the citizen is not a resident. A citizen can not vote when a jury votes unless the citizen is a member of the jury. Most everyone understands that there are things not included in “the right to vote” even though the words themselves do not exclude them.
So what about “the right to keep and bear arms”? What might not be included even though the words in and of themselves do not exclude them? Is a man on the gallows for murder included? How about a three year old? If the 2A is clear as a bell to you, please address that.
“IMO, 0bama, BiteMe and their gang are going nowhere with their gun grabbing wet dream.”
Probably so. And we’re unlikely to convince many of the folks on the far left that they are wrong (at least until they get mugged). But there are a lot of people in the middle who might be convinced one way or the other. We need to make things clear to them and to do that we need to be able to articulate our position and to do that we need to understand it at more than the sound bite level.
As I recall, Heller left the door open on the meaning of RKBA. If we don’t have good reasoning, subsequent decisions could go against us, with the support of the majority. So what do we do then? We could resist by force of arms. What if we win on that basis? By our own lights we couldn’t take away the arms of the other side even if we won, due to RKBA. That could make for a long and nasty fight.
Better to win by force of reason, the civilized way.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.