Pacifists, too, have Second Amendment rights. [Right]I agree with Mr. Madison:
In what was to become the second amendment, the right to bear arms, Madison proposed a recognition of the rights of what we would call conscientious objectors: "no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms, shall be compelled to render military service in person."That doesn't mean they have the right to impose their superstitions on me--matter of fact, one would think the First Amendment would specifically prohibit the government enforcing such dogma. That is, if honest men made laws and honest men judged based on them.
As for disparaging either hunting or self-defense or even militia capabilities of air guns, tell that to this guy.
[Via Defender]
3 comments:
"Conspicuously missing from the excerpts that defendant selected is any reference to the use of air guns in the early 19th century for self-defense."
But...but.. the Constitution is a "living document" adaptable to the mores and fads of subsequent eras!
They want it BOTH ways, the Axis of Weasels.
virtually everything can be used as a weapon, like an australian government anti-alcohol campaign says 'one punch can kill'. denying guns to people means that those with the biggest muscles and the largest gangs hold sway. guns balance that out so all of the population has a close-to-level ability to kill an attacker.
i'm not surprised that compressed gas powered can be used against large game. you can use a sharpened stick to kill large game.
.458 Caliber? I've got a better story. A friend of mine has routinely killed 200-250 pound feral hogs with a .177 Caliber airgun. One shot one kill. Has to do with shot placement.
This "arms" business all has to do with whatever definition the gun hating wordtwisters can convince the already biased judge is applicable for a conviction.
[W3]
Post a Comment