|
|
 Up |
|
|
  |
Author: Bret CahillBret Cahill Date: Mar 23, 2008 21:47
First of all, DC ain't no state. They have no senators of their own,
just some representing _other_ states, or more accurately, outside the
beltway bandits.
Second, it would be very difficult to regulate a DC militia as
everyone can just go to Virginia and buy an AK-47.
Third, do libertarians REALLY want the nation's seat of gummint to be
armed?
Bret Cahill
|
| |
|
| | 48 Comments |
|
|
Author: ImmortalistImmortalist Date: Mar 23, 2008 22:12
On Mar 23, 9:47 pm, Bret Cahill aol.com> wrote:> First of all, DC ain't no state. They have no senators of their own,
> just some representing _other_ states, or more accurately, outside the
> beltway bandits.
>
> Second, it would be very difficult to regulate a DC militia as
> everyone can just go to Virginia and buy an AK-47.
>
> Third, do libertarians REALLY want the nation's seat of gummint to be
> armed?
>
> Bret Cahill
Wikipedia did a pretty good job on this subject, at least as an
introduction, I liked these points;
|
| Show full article (1.94Kb) |
|
| | no comments |
|
|
Author: turtoniturtoni Date: Mar 23, 2008 22:22
On Mar 24, 1:12 am, Immortalist yahoo.com> wrote:> On Mar 23, 9:47 pm, Bret Cahill aol.com> wrote:
>>> First of all, DC ain't no state. They have no senators of their own,
>> just some representing _other_ states, or more accurately, outside the
>> beltway bandits.
>
>> Second, it would be very difficult to regulate a DC militia as
>> everyone can just go to Virginia and buy an AK-47.
>
>> Third, do libertarians REALLY want the nation's seat of gummint to be
>> armed?
>
>> Bret Cahill
>
> Wikipedia did a pretty good job on this subject, at least as an
> introduction, I liked these points;
>
> ...the origin of the term bear arms: "By legal and other channels, the
> Latin "arma ferre" entered deeply into the European language of war. ...
|
| Show full article (2.25Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: turtoniturtoni Date: Mar 23, 2008 22:24
On Mar 24, 1:22 am, turtoni fastmail.net> wrote:> On Mar 24, 1:12 am, Immortalist yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>>> On Mar 23, 9:47 pm, Bret Cahill aol.com> wrote:>
>>> First of all, DC ain't no state. They have no senators of their own,
>>> just some representing _other_ states, or more accurately, outside the
>>> beltway bandits.
>
>>> Second, it would be very difficult to regulate a DC militia as
>>> everyone can just go to Virginia and buy an AK-47.
>
>>> Third, do libertarians REALLY want the nation's seat of gummint to be
>>> armed?
>
>>> Bret Cahill ...
|
| Show full article (2.46Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Bret CahillBret Cahill Date: Mar 23, 2008 22:27
>> First of all, DC ain't no state. �They have no senators of their own,
>> just some representing _other_ states, or more accurately, outside the
>> beltway bandits.
>
>> Second, it would be very difficult to regulate a DC militia as
>> everyone can just go to Virginia and buy an AK-47.
>
>> Third, do libertarians REALLY want the nation's seat of gummint to be
>> armed?
>
>> Bret Cahill
>
> Wikipedia did a pretty good job on this subject, at least as an
> introduction, I liked these points;
>
> ...the origin of the term bear arms: "By legal and other channels, the
> Latin "arma ferre" entered deeply into the European language of war.
A war against Hollywood style hearth invaders?
Bret Cahill
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: tgtg Date: Mar 24, 2008 03:50
On Mar 24, 1:12 am, Immortalist yahoo.com> wrote:> On Mar 23, 9:47 pm, Bret Cahill aol.com> wrote:
>>> First of all, DC ain't no state. They have no senators of their own,
>> just some representing _other_ states, or more accurately, outside the
>> beltway bandits.
>
>> Second, it would be very difficult to regulate a DC militia as
>> everyone can just go to Virginia and buy an AK-47.
>
>> Third, do libertarians REALLY want the nation's seat of gummint to be
>> armed?
>
>> Bret Cahill
>
> Wikipedia did a pretty good job on this subject, at least as an
> introduction, I liked these points;
>
> ...the origin of the term bear arms: "By legal and other channels, the
> Latin "arma ferre" entered deeply into the European language of war. ...
|
| Show full article (2.60Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Date: Mar 24, 2008 06:01
>What interpretation would allow for carrying a handgun to the mall or
>a baseball game, for example? Clearly, the risk of causing panic is in
>the same class as crying "fire" in such a situation.
It depends upon where in the USA you live. In New Mexico (at least in the
early 80s) anyone witout a conviction could carry a nonconcealed firearm
without a permit. A typical scene is walking into a shop behind a bloke who
has a pistol or revolver on his side. No panic. It was so ordinary. Other
places in the USA issue only concealed weapons permits which absolutely
require that it not be visible. (A local had a concealed permit was thrown
in jail because he let weapon show.)
Here we have what is called "must issue" when they deal with applications
for concealed handgun permit. That means if the applicant has no
disqualifications (for example, a felony conviction, a determination of
mental incompetence, or a record of domestic abuse), the authorities are
obligated to approve the permit.
But a handgun is a might poor weapon for war. So back to the subject.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: tgtg Date: Mar 24, 2008 07:15
On Mar 24, 9:01 am, wrote:
>>What interpretation would allow for carrying a handgun to the mall or
>>a baseball game, for example? Clearly, the risk of causing panic is in
>>the same class as crying "fire" in such a situation.
>
>
> Here we have what is called "must issue" when they deal with applications
> for concealed handgun permit. That means if the applicant has no
> disqualifications (for example, a felony conviction, a determination of
> mental incompetence, or a record of domestic abuse), the authorities are
> obligated to approve the permit.
>
What does that have to do with anything?
-tg
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: MichaelNJMichaelNJ Date: Mar 24, 2008 08:04
On Mar 24, 1:12 am, Immortalist yahoo.com> wrote:> On Mar 23, 9:47 pm, Bret Cahill aol.com> wrote:
>>> First of all, DC ain't no state. They have no senators of their own,
>> just some representing _other_ states, or more accurately, outside the
>> beltway bandits.
>
>> Second, it would be very difficult to regulate a DC militia as
>> everyone can just go to Virginia and buy an AK-47.
>
>> Third, do libertarians REALLY want the nation's seat of gummint to be
>> armed?
>
>> Bret Cahill
>
> Wikipedia did a pretty good job on this subject, at least as an
> introduction, I liked these points;
>
> ...the origin of the term bear arms: "By legal and other channels, the
> Latin "arma ferre" entered deeply into the European language of war. ...
|
| Show full article (2.95Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
|
Author: tgtg Date: Mar 24, 2008 08:22
On Mar 24, 11:04 am, Michae...@ gmail.com wrote: > On Mar 24, 1:12 am, Immortalist yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>>> On Mar 23, 9:47 pm, Bret Cahill aol.com> wrote:>
>>> First of all, DC ain't no state. They have no senators of their own,
>>> just some representing _other_ states, or more accurately, outside the
>>> beltway bandits.
>
>>> Second, it would be very difficult to regulate a DC militia as
>>> everyone can just go to Virginia and buy an AK-47.
>
>>> Third, do libertarians REALLY want the nation's seat of gummint to be
>>> armed?
>
>>> Bret Cahill
>
>> Wikipedia did a pretty good job on this subject, at least as an ...
|
| Show full article (3.50Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
