[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: democracy?! (Re: Terrorism is a NON-THREAT (fwd)
> > Your constitution says you can own and carry
> > guns; your politicians and law enforcement increasingly say that you
> > can not. Your response to my saying that is that _I_ don't understand
> > the constitution?
>
> No, my responce is prove your assertions. Explain to me why you believe
> these are valid views and why they provide a more usable environment for
> understanding what is going on then others.
What do you want proven? That the second ammendment is absolute? Even if
one does not believe that (I personally do from a simple libertarian
point of view rather than that of a constitutionalist) then surely the
level of infringement of 2nd ammendment rights currently seen must
indicate to you a validity of the statement "Congress either doesn`t
understand or ignores the constitution".
> > The point was there were way less laws, and few were telling their
> > neighbours what they could think.
>
> Really? What was the law count say in 1865 versus 1965? 1897 v 1997?
We really don`t need a "law count", more new laws are passed than old
ones are repealed or fall into disuse. Therefore there is an increasing
law count, of course a lot of laws have counter-laws that contradict them
but this does not reduce the law count, infact it effectively increases
it by making there a larger number of things for which one can be
convicted of breaking the law.
Datacomms Technologies data security
Paul Bradley, [email protected]
[email protected], [email protected]
Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
"Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"