guns & purses (was Re: guns & crime)

[JKSCHW at aol.com]

These are different arguments than the absurd notion that private gun 
ownership keeps tyranny in check. I don't think they hold water, but they are 
not stupid, unlike that argument. And from a legal professional's point of 
view, the 2d A doesn't guarantee a private citizen's right to bear arms 
outside the context of the National Guard. --jks

In a message dated Tue, 17 Oct 2000  5:44:59 PM Eastern Daylight Time, martin 
schiller <mschiller at mac.com> writes:

<< JKSCHW at aol.com said on 10/17/00 12:51 PM


>They are not pervious to reason. --jks

Carroll said something earlier in the thread about reason, also. That he 
would exclude arguments from the table that were not reasonable. But by 
whose reason? 

Some of us reason that the 2nd amendment is a symbol of the spirit of 
responsibility that attaches to citizenship. It's the legal basis for 
activism as well as a framework for ethical beliefs. 

Perhaps there will come a time for more drum beating and less 
gum-beating. Perhaps not. But to have elected officials and legal 
professionals demeaning the symbol is troubling. Certainly it doesn't 
take a rhodes scholar to see that neither the rights of hunters or 
freedom to protect your home are at issue. It's much more important.

 >>