On 9 Feb 2004 14:03:08 -0800, jim rozen
wrote:

In article , Gunner says...

Which restrictions and which Supreme Court?

The court, as an institution. Over the years
it has been pretty clear that reasonable time,
place and manner restrictions on things like
free exercise, or free speech, have been
endorsed many many times.

At one time the various Supreme Courts held slavery was legal as well
as Poll Taxes, etc.

Free speech is not an absolute right. Nor,
apparently is weapons ownership.

Free speech IS an absolute right. You just have to be careful about
how you exercise it.

No screaming fire in a crowded theater without a fire, no shooting the
place up without a damned good reason.


This is one of the problems of claiming
equal treatment between the first and second
amemendment - sure the court does place limits
and restrictions on the first. So it makes
sense that they should do the same, to the
second as well.

Pretty much depends on what those "restrictions" are, doesnt it?

Or is your position that the second amendment
is somehow more important than the first, and
therefor should be exempt from any interpretation
at all? If that's the case, I *do* claim
equal treatment between the two, because the
first thing in the morning I'm starting the
Dali Jim Llama Church of Metalworking and filing
for tax exempt status. My religion prohibits
paying taxes, of course!

Jim


Go for it. Its your right. Just make sure you get all your papers
filed and dot yur i's and all that good stuff because if you dont,
large burley men with guns will be visiting you.

I strongly suggest fireproof construction techniques and maybe some
tank traps

Gunner



================================================= =
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
================================================= =

"To be civilized is to restrain the ability to commit mayhem.
To be incapable of committing mayhem is not the mark of the civilized,
merely the domesticated." - Trefor Thomas