Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Lazamataz
If we assume that the text of the Second Amendment does not make a distinction between dicriminating and indiscriminate weapons and if we further assume that none of the persons associated with the adoption of the Second Amendment ever even considered the distinction, can we nevertheless conclude that the Second Amendment protects only discriminating weapons because, if the persons associated with the adoption of amendment had actually thought about the distinction, they would have intended to limit the Second Amendment's protection to discriminating weapons?
25 posted on 04/18/2002 10:23:52 AM PDT by humbletheFiend
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: humbletheFiend
There was only one known indiscriminate weapon of mass destruction known to the founding fathers at that time: biological agents.

One can reasonably conjecture that if they were interested in including indisriminate weapons, that the Second Amendment would read: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, and to keep and spread Contagious Diseases, shall not be infringed.

30 posted on 04/18/2002 10:34:45 AM PDT by Lazamataz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson