or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by Lighthouse

No no no. The state's right interpretation died in Heller. It (state's right view) stemmed from a misreading of case called Miller. My point is that the "oooh militia!" crowd's argument hits a dead end. Play the tape . . .If the second amendment is a state's right, rather than an individual right, then the federal government may not infringe a state's right to arm its militia.And Breitbart would be lucky to have me as a contributing writer.
Rifles are much deadlier if you have time to line up a shot. Handguns are less accurate as a result of barrel length, recoil, and trigger feel. But they are much better in close quarters. Being able to adjust one's aim quickly, with a wider field of view, is important when confronted with desks, walls, doors, and a quickly moving target.
The Second Amendment is tied directly to Locke's principle of the consent of the governed. Its in the Declaration of Independence. Gun banners focus on the "militia" preamble, but if that's the case, then the feds still have no right to interfere with a state's militia. And the national guard, which is federally controlled, is not a state militia.
Hmmph. You obviously aren't familiar with the Kaptain Krunch Kollective.
The media was cowed by public opinion during the first term of the Bush Administration. More evidence that MSM = losers, cowards, and twits
Harold, in an odd way, you're uplifting.I know there is someone out there with less hope for civilization than me.
He seems like a genuine fellow to me, even though he probably views raw sheep liver as a fine dessert.
In terms of danger:Serial Killer > Clumsy Narcissist
New Posts  All Forums: