CONGRESS is the PROBLEM! Was Re: Stupid Americans Re: HOORAY for Surg

Dave Palmer arxt at quads.uchicago.edu
Sun Dec 19 18:33:59 EST 1993


In article <2f0mka$570 at apple.com> morley at apple.com (John Morley) writes:

	The 2nd ammendment is a thorny one.  I believe that the
	intent of the framers was to provide a check and balance
	that would make it difficult for a totalitarian government
	to take over this country since the populace would be allowed
	equal access to armaments.

yes! thomas jeffersons idea was that revolution was the ultimate
democratic act.  the people who say that "well regulated militia"
means the national guard are wrong.. the national guard PUTS DOWN
revolution.  also a "well regulated militia" could not be sent down to
central america by the government..

	Nowadays this is somewhat outdated unless you interpret
	it to allow backyard nukes in every suburb.  So with
	the government holding the absolute upper hand when it
	comes to war toys, what is the need for the populace to
	arm themselves?

the u.s. is the most powerful military force on the planet.. but that
doesnt mean to just give up.  it does mean to try to find alternatives
to a violent revolution, but it doesnt mean to totally rule out the
possibility

	I think there are valid arguments both for and against
	the posession of firearms by individuals.

my personal attitude is that no government is legitimate, and
therefore has no right to tell people what to do.  but that is not the
attitude of the n.r.a., or hand gun control, inc., etc.

	What I find annoying in the extreme is the insistance of
	the gun lobby to reject any form of regulation with regard
	to gun ownership.  I mean doesn't it strike you as odd that
	it should be easier to qualify for ownership of a gun than
	an automobile?

last i checked, cars killed more people (tho that might have
changed).. and in chicago, rats kill more people than assault
weapons, but nobodys talking about putting a ban on rodents.  no
rodent control activist groups yet...

	Strict licensing and testing provisions don't raise
	cries of foul when they are applied to the privilege of
	driving; why should they be considered more heinous
	when applied to the privilege of owning a lethal weapon?

its not a priviledge.. im sorry, man, but that word pisses me off.
makes it seem like the government is being generous in giving people
the rights which they already had.  as if people have no rights
except the ones that uncle samuel allows them to have... oh
please please uncle can i do this? please uncle let me have free
speech. ok kid but only if you dont give away any military secrets,
and dont say anything bad about me.  oh yeah and dont print any comic
books about jeffery dahmer.  sure thing, uncle! alright, here you go,
kid... FUCK IT! cant you see that we already have these rights? we are
human beings, we are free! the government cannot give us rights, we
already have them! it can only take them away..

-- 
"Once I had a little game
I liked to crawl back into my brain
I think you know the game I mean
I mean the game called 'go insane'"                       Jim Morrison



More information about the Plantbio mailing list