"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...
Cecil Chapman wrote:

But Jeff, the words hearken back to the situation that they arose from -
They had guns and when they wanted to oust the British control this was
INDEED handy! The second amendment just recognizes that it was
important
for its' citizens to have access to guns in order to have a militia to
call,
in times of threat.

I go back to what I said before. The average citizen has NO need to
have
armor piercing bullets (or rounds that will effectively do the same).
Any
cop-friend will tell you is to get a shotgun for home protection, you
just
point in the 'general direction' and you'll hit the intruder. Handguns
are
just fine, too and I have had NO problem with the notion of
registration -
though I would be remiss to point out that many crimes are committed
with
stolen weapons, anyways. I've just been saying that Joe Bob down the
street
doesn't need a shoulder fired missile, armor piercing bullets, automatic
weapons to defend his/her home. Unless he is out in the woods and up
against some real bad-assed deer named Rambo grin.

You really don't understand the Constitution, do you? The point was
allowing people to protect themselves from the government, not the thief
down the street. If the government has better weapons than the
populace, then protecting yourself from the government isn't possible,
is it?


What I DO agree with is that some of the legislation tries to blur the
line
between automatic (already illegal) and semiautomatic. According to one
piece of legislation that almost went through out here in California, a
simple Marlin .22 rifle was going to be declared illegal because it had
a
magazine that carried the specified amount of rounds - that kind of
thinking
was absurd and even here in California that part of the legislation got
tossed out on its' butt. But,,,, an AK-47??? Joe Citizen has NO needs
for
that.

Sure he does. You just don't understand the reason. Sure, we've had
225+ years of reasonable government, but not all governments stay
reasonable. You need a means to ensure that and freedom of the press is
one means and force is the other.


Matt

The problem is most people believe the populace is subservient to the
government which of course is 180 degrees out of whack. The constitution
provided for us to overthrow the government if necessary but most people are
totally incapable of comprehending the possibility.