On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 23:30:29 GMT, Zane
wrote:
>On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 14:57:24 -0700, Hatunen wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 07:56:44 -0600, Zane
>> wrote:
>>
>>>Many historians agree that the reason for the US Constitutional
>>>Amendment that keeps the federal government from banning firearms was
>>>to make sure that the populace would be able to overthrow the
>>>Government in the future, if need be.
>>
>>And many historians don't agree.
>
>No kidding?
>
>> Butmost agree that the intend
>>was to maintain a well-armed militia.
>
>I don't know whether that's accurate or not. I don't know how you
>could know either.
Well, duh. Maybe because the Constitution says, "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."
See also http://www.gpoaccess.gov/constitution/pdf2002/020.pdf
page 1274 for a Supreme Court decision, United States v. Miller,
regarding the milita aspect.
The entire case can be read at
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0307_0174_ZO.html
--
************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@cox.net) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps * |