arma virumque cano (et alia)
A, the vapid 'nuke' argument. There is a clear delineation between the arms of the individual and area weapons. C'mon Mike, don't sink to such a failed level...
What failed level, Rev? Even you are in favor of some gun control, am I wrong?
Uh, he said everyone is for some kind of gun control, but then goes on to name all kinds of things that aren't regarded as guns. Talk about weaseling.And when phasers get invented, I'll want one.
We've had this argument before when you showed how ridiculously contentions you really are. Even you want some forms of gun control. Why is that so hard to admit?
Because nukes, tanks, howitzers, bioweapons, and so forth aren't the kind of thing described by the Second Amendment. Did you read my "Size Matters" essay?
Sure, Greg, and your Glock was described in the 2A?
I don't own a Glock, but handguns certainly were described. I can't help it if you refuse to understand what "arms" referred to.
Greg, the meaning of "arms" was as different in the 18th century as the meaning of "militia." Get honest.
I am. Arms referred to what a gentleman was expected to know and use: handgun, long gun, sword, dagger, etc. The extraordinary idea of America was to say that we're all gentlemen. To put that in modern terms, we're all citizens, not subjects.
Two more points:1. I have a hard time taking advice to act like an adult from someone with as foul a mouth as that.2. He needs to spend more time learning how to edit film.
"Moment of Clarity" my ass, parroting second-hand opinions of statist lieges with the intellectual honesty of a criminal politician.orlin sellers