Originally Posted by flo
Sorry, Dave, but you are totally wrong here. The second amendment only affirms our God-given right. The forefathers knew we had to be armed to resist a tyrannical government, like King George's. The intent of the Second Amendment is to be certain that the people were armed at the same level as the government, purely to make sure that attempted tyranny would be a bloody and dangerous business.
Careful with your statements about our supposed "love" of guns and our beloved Constitution. Just saying.
Well in that case...I suppose consitutionally...you should be able to have machine guns after all....I always thought it was for protection...but not to be equal to the Government in turms of arms....that I didnt know.
thing is I already think your Government...by Consitutional levels is Tyranical...not because its oppressing its people...but because its acting well beyond its design brief...I mean...how can a Federal Government go from only being able to make laws concerning imports/exports and Transport...to making ANY laws about Education or Health whatsoever?
I know it had to act beyond its design brief during the Civil War...but its like your Government (as in Federal) is still acting on the same level as it did during the Civil War...thats not inkeeping with the general peace time principles where State Governments are supposed to be incharge...and the Federation nothing more then a collection of State Government representatives.
That happened without any "bloody and dangerous business"
What are your thoughts on the actual physical Federal Government? is its very permanent being (rather then convention style congressionals) actually completely in contradiction of the consitutional basis for its existance? You seem to know a lot about it...I just want to be sure that what I have in my mind...is correct in that situation.