On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 15:39:41 -0500, Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 12:13:56 -0800, Gunner
wrote:

On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 12:16:06 -0500, Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 12:11:11 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
m...

Think about it: If you never need it for self defense or for the
militia purpose, or any other purpose, other than to prevent it from
being taken away...why would you "need" it in the first place?

Ed Huntress

Is that also your philosophy on insurance?

You need insurance in case something particular happens to you -- a
car accident, a health emergency, death -- whatever.

Likewise, the 2nd. Its purpose is to provide a means of self-defense,
or of assembling a state militia -- whatever.

If you "only need it when they try to take it away," and you never
need it otherwise, what is its purpose?

You're not thinking about the meaning of that quip.

"...and by the way, Mr.Speaker, the Second Amendment is not for
killing little ducks and leaving Huey and Dewey and Louie without an
aunt and uncle. It's for hunting politicians, like in Grozny, and in
the colonies in 1776, or when they take your independence away."
Representative Bob Dornan

That's not what the quip says. It says you won't need it until someone
tries to take it away.

So, Gunner, if someone invades your house and threatens to kill you,
just roll over. You won't need the 2nd, if you believe that quip.

What..you dont like B1 Bob either?


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