"Our home is still intact touch Liz." Freudian slip, S? ;-)
Liz -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Clogtowner Sent: Saturday, October 25, 2008 8:57 AM To: Memphis Freethought Alliance Subject: Re: Conservative Justices Abandon Strict Construction? Hi y'all - I agree that a handgun etc. is not much protection against the Govt. - look at Waco. Here are some facts that I think are relevant. When I first moved here (in the sticks) 20 years ago, the Sheriff told me to get a gun and shoot to kill - he also said to make sure that I drag the body into the house and there would be no questions asked. I am now told that I don't need to drag the body into the house as the law has changed. My wife has 8 brothers and sisters living in UK. Everyone of them has had their home broken into at least once in the last 20 years and none of them know anyone who hasn't had their home broken into. None of them will walk the few hundred yards home from the local pub in the dark - they get a taxi. Our home is still intact touch Liz. On Oct 25, 1:03 am, ornamentalmind <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I find it a sad thing indeed that civics is no longer a required > subject in public schools. It is clear that far too few citizens have > a clue... > > And, for those who have the mistaken belief that owning a handgun is > much protection, if it makes you feel better, fine, however, when/if > the government comes after you, remember they are a bit better > armed...all the way up to nukes. > > On Oct 24, 10:01 pm, Aaron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > The Courts do not focus on the founders because they were gods but > > because their ideas were ratified by the people and remain the law of > > the land until the people change it. That's the way it should be. As > > soon as an amendment is ratified, the Courts stop focusing on the > > founders for that part and start focusing on the legislators who > > passed the amendment. > > > The procedure doesn't just apply to the Constitution. Courts will > > focus on the legislative intent of any statute, whether it was passed > > last week or 100 years ago. Would we really want them doing anything > > else? > > > Aaron > > > On Oct 24, 8:49 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > When people are talking about the constitution, they try to figure out what > > > the founding fathers meant by this and that as if they were gods. The > > > founding fathers are dead and I don't particularly care how they would interpret > > > something. What I care about is what is in the best interest of the world as > > > we know it now. Trying to figure out what the founding fathers would do or > > > what they meant is like trying to figure out what a doctor of that age would do > > > to treat cancer. It is irrelevant. > > > The bottom line is I am packing a legal pistol and I am happy that law > > > abiding citizens have that right. > > > > J.- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Memphis Freethought Alliance" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/memphisfreethoughtalliance?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
