On Sun, 03 Feb 2013 08:59:25 -0800, Gunner
wrote:

On Fri, 1 Feb 2013 16:46:36 -0500, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


Are you catching on yet? You keep repeating your silly mantra that
"criminals don't care if their guns are registered," missing the point that
the purpose is to keep those guns out of criminal hands with a sensible
system of deterrents.

Maybe you should run for the NRA Board. You'd fit right in. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

'What part of "Shall not be infringed" do you not comprehend?

I comprehend the part that you don't.

Start by looking up the historical meaning of "infringed." It meant
"to defeat" or "to invalidate" the exercise of something, like a right
or a license. If you're going to rely on original meaning, you need to
understand the historical meaning of the words.

Since Heller, the RKBA can't be infringed. You have a right to keep
arms -- the ones in "common use" for defending oneself or one's home.

Nowhere in history has it been interpreted to mean you can have ANY
gun, anywhere, at any time. Look at the citations in D.C. v. Heller
and you'll see the history that Scalia relied on for the ruling.


Btw...your First Amendment Rights have been removed. Please turn in
your computer on the way out.

Is that only in Taft, or throught Gun Fantasy Land?

--
Ed Huntress


Gunner

The methodology of the left has always been:

1. Lie
2. Repeat the lie as many times as possible
3. Have as many people repeat the lie as often as possible
4. Eventually, the uninformed believe the lie
5. The lie will then be made into some form oflaw
6. Then everyone must conform to the lie