GUNS: Re: Why Here?

From: Joe Dees (joedees@addall.com)
Date: Wed Sep 20 2000 - 14:32:56 MDT

('binary' encoding is not supported, stored as-is) >Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 08:45:09 -0700 (PDT)
>From: Brian D Williams <talon57@well.com>
>To: extropians@extropy.org
>Subject: GUNS: Re: Why Here?
>Reply-To: extropians@extropy.org
>
>
>From: "Joe Dees" <joedees@addall.com>
>
>>A well-regulated militia was intended to protect the powers of the
>>states against federal usurpation (which is why states were
>>supposed to be their regulators); this was also the reason for the
>>10th amendment (that all powers not specifically granted to the
>>federal government should devolve to the states). However, the
>>Civil War proved that states could not exercise a right to secede
>>from the Union, and the state National Guards keep their weapons
>>in armories, unlike the militias, which depended upon the
>>citizen-soldiers to furnish their own.
>
>The purpose of the Second Amendment is so that individuals acting
>either alone or in conjunction with their neighbors can protect
>themselves not only from criminals, but from any form of
>government, federal, state, city, what have you.
>
The full text of the 2nd amendment:

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

As is blindingly obvious, well-regulated militias and the dependence of the security of free states upon them are the reasons given, WITHIN THE 1791 AMENDMENT ITSELF, for preserving the right to keep and bear arms.

>>But gun control was not practiced by those governments - citizen
>>disarmament was. There should be no argument that while sane and
>>law-abiding citizens should have the right to keep and bear, that
>>the means to commit quick and easy long-range mass murder should
>>be, as much as possible, kept out of the hands of kids, criminals
>>and psychos, who cannot discharge the resposibilities concomittant
>>with such rights in a responsible manner. Certainly they should
>>not be able to simply walk into a Wal-Mart and legally purchase
>>such killing tools at a moment's notice. This is the type of gun
>>control that I, and all reasonable people, support.
>
>As I've pointed out at length a number of times, it is already
>against existing federal law for kids, criminals, and psychos to
>buy or be in possession of firearms.
>
>A fact you continue to ignore.
>
But the loopholes in the laws could accommodate Mack trucks, certainly MAC-10's (previously purchased, or imported, assault weapons and clips were grandfathered in). The flea market and gun show loophole allows felons to purchase, and the 25% of dealers there who are private have no checking requirements on them. And about that I'm-a-collector-who-buys-a-thousand-of-the-same-model-each-week private citizen loophole - guess how the weapons find themselves into black markets?
>
>Here in Illinois we already have:
>
>1)Licensing
>
>2)Waiting periods
>
>3)Instant Background checks
>
>4) Chicago has a 20 year complete ban on handguns (except for the
>mayor and city council).
>
>Plus a variety of other laws, all to no effect.
>
I suggested others that would have more effect, and the NICS checks will have more effect once more of the relevant records are computerized, which is NOT the case presently.
>
>Brian
>
>Member:
>Extropy Institute, www.extropy.org
>Adler Planetarium www.adlerplanetarium.org
>Life Extension Foundation, www.lef.org
>National Rifle Association, www.nra.org, 1.800.672.3888
>Mars Society, www.marssociety.org
>Ameritech Data Center Chicago, IL, Local 134 I.B.E.W
>
>

------------------------------------------------------------
Looking for a book? Want a deal? No problem AddALL!
http://www.addall.com compares book price at 41 online stores.

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:31:05 MST