Re: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] [POLITICS][RELIGION] a top 20 story at reddit.com...

[Mike Miller <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

On Sat, 4 Mar 2006, Nathan Odle wrote:

> The only issue I have with the ACLU really is that they claim to defend 
> the Bill of Rights but 'conveniently' overlook the 2nd Amendment.  For 
> this reason I belong to both the ACLU *and* the NRA, figuring that 
> they'll more-or-less get the job done while perhaps counterbalancing one 
> anothers' radical tendencies :)

You are one of the few people who belongs to both.  (That's another of 
those odd sentences we were discussing the other day.)

I think the ACLU isn't overlooking the 2nd Amendment; they're just 
interpretting it less broadly than you would like.  If you can give an 
example where you thought the 2nd Amendment was being violated but the 
ACLU did nothing, that would help to clarify what they've been doing 
wrong.

I was just looking over this...

http://www.saf.org/

...and it seems that they interpret our very brief 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.

...to mean that people should be allowed to carry concealed handguns to 
protect against robbery.  That doesn't seem to be the intention of the 
Amendment.  One of the really big problems here is that the authors of 
that Amendment didn't even know about handguns (I think) and they sure 
didn't know about the powerful weapons that we have today.  I wonder what 
they would write if they were writing that amendment today.  I think it 
would be lot longer.

Mike

_______________________________________________
discussion mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/discussion