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

To: inquest
Since you concede that the nature of arms have changed since 1791, we need to pass a new constitutional amendment in order to define arms more specifically.

Maybe, or maybe we can simply use the logic and common sense of the inherent bracketing of rights as I have described them. However, if you were interested in a more precise amendement, I would recommend you use my discrimination arguments above.

The discrimination-test will allow for individual possession of laser, plasma, and other directed-energy small arms that the present interpretation of the amendment may not allow. The courts are likely -- at present -- to deny possession of laser pistols to the common man, and I find this to be an abhorrant future probability.

When lasers are outlawed, only Klingons will have lasers.

45 posted on 04/18/2002 10:48:36 AM PDT by Lazamataz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]


To: Lazamataz
Maybe, or maybe we can simply use the logic and common sense of the inherent bracketing of rights as I have described them.

The only problem I have with that idea is that I don't trust the courts to make "common-sense" modifications of the law, any further than I can throw them (all of them). As it is, they're already quite happy to rearrange the law to their aesthetic sensibilities; I don't want to encourage them any further.

And like I said earlier, even if an amendment isn't passed, the states still have all the sovereign powers they need to protect our legitimate rights.

53 posted on 04/18/2002 10:56:57 AM PDT by inquest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | 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