Fidonet Portal






From: Gunner Asch (1:396/4)
To: n/a
Date: Sun, 29.07.18 07:45
Re: What sane 2nd Ammendment?
From: Gunner Asch

On Sat, 28 Jul 2018 23:17:05 -0800, Dim Witte
wrote:

>On Sat, 28 Jul 2018 20:06:31 -0700, Gunner Asch
>wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 28 Jul 2018 18:19:34 -0800, Dim Witte
>>wrote:
>>
>>> My limit would be maybe just for:
>>
>>Too bad the Founders disagreed with you.
>
>Just trying to make allowances for the changes of reference we have
>now, allowing pretty much what people need for personal defences, what
>the local gangs are up to not so much.
>
>Surely you aren't in favor of literally allowing what military use?
>Think of what will probably be coming up in the future, like ray guns,
>sonic and laser weapons, brain-damaging bolts of electricity, etc..

Yes and? Where is the problem?


>
>>
>>---
>>This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>>https://www.avast.com/antivirus
--- NewsGate v1.0 gamma 2
* Origin: News Gate @ Net396 -Huntsville, AL - USA (1:396/4)

From: Gunner Asch (1:396/4)
To: n/a
Date: Sun, 29.07.18 07:46
Re: What sane 2nd Ammendment?
From: Gunner Asch

On Sat, 28 Jul 2018 23:30:01 -0800, Dim Witte
wrote:

>
>Have to be pragmatic about making changes to the Constitution that
>Congress and political parties allow. Maybe think along the lines of
>what Supreme Court would consider reasonalble.

Im all in favor of bringing back and legalizing dueling. Then I could
call you out.

Sledge hammers in say..6' of water perhaps?


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

--- NewsGate v1.0 gamma 2
* Origin: News Gate @ Net396 -Huntsville, AL - USA (1:396/4)

From: Dim Witte (1:396/4)
To: n/a
Date: Sun, 29.07.18 07:15
Re: What sane 2nd Ammendment?
From: Dim Witte

On Sun, 29 Jul 2018 18:45:00 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

>On Sat, 28 Jul 2018 23:17:05 -0800, Dim Witte
>wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 28 Jul 2018 20:06:31 -0700, Gunner Asch
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Sat, 28 Jul 2018 18:19:34 -0800, Dim Witte
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>> My limit would be maybe just for:
>>>
>>>Too bad the Founders disagreed with you.
>>
>>Just trying to make allowances for the changes of reference we have
>>now, allowing pretty much what people need for personal defences, what
>>the local gangs are up to not so much.
>>
>>Surely you aren't in favor of literally allowing what military use?
>>Think of what will probably be coming up in the future, like ray guns,
>>sonic and laser weapons, brain-damaging bolts of electricity, etc..
>
>Yes and? Where is the problem?

Well, hand grenades and napalm bombs leave bars and shooting ranges in
a mess.
>
>
>>
>>>
>>>---
>>>This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>>>https://www.avast.com/antivirus
--- NewsGate v1.0 gamma 2
* Origin: News Gate @ Net396 -Huntsville, AL - USA (1:396/4)

From: Dim Witte (1:396/4)
To: n/a
Date: Sun, 29.07.18 07:27
Re: What sane 2nd Ammendment?
From: Dim Witte

On Sun, 29 Jul 2018 17:05:34 -0700, Winston_Smith
wrote:

>On Sat, 28 Jul 2018 23:30:01 -0800, Dim Witte wrote:
>
>>Have to be pragmatic about making changes to the Constitution that
>>Congress and political parties allow. Maybe think along the lines of
>>what Supreme Court would consider reasonalble.
>
>Who the hell put them in charge? They are bound by the Constitution.
>The Constitution is NOT bound by what some current swamp dwellers say
>is "reasonable" because they have to bow to SCOTUS.

I think lawyers assume that laws are for the "reasonable man," and
weigh that in with making new laws and interpreting old ones. So I
assume a moderation of the 2nd Amendment would employ language like
that. Either you understand that the 2nd Amendment now is somewhat
unreasonable, or you don't.

>Bottom line, SCOTUS and the swamp dwelling politicritters get what
>little power we the people have chose to give them. Pending good
>behavior. All power rests with the people and the Constitution is
>nothing more than a very short list we have delegated.

Fine, both liberals and conservatives must respect common law that
evolves among popular understanding, I thinks. You got your popular
law and arbitrary laws written ex cathedra. Both are in British and
U.S. laws; so maybe a little more popular law is in order?

>
>I understand this may be a foreign concept to socialists such as
>yourself.
--- NewsGate v1.0 gamma 2
* Origin: News Gate @ Net396 -Huntsville, AL - USA (1:396/4)

From: Dim Witte (1:396/4)
To: n/a
Date: Sun, 29.07.18 07:32
Re: What sane 2nd Ammendment?
From: Dim Witte

On Sun, 29 Jul 2018 18:46:15 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

>On Sat, 28 Jul 2018 23:30:01 -0800, Dim Witte
>wrote:
>
>>
>>Have to be pragmatic about making changes to the Constitution that
>>Congress and political parties allow. Maybe think along the lines of
>>what Supreme Court would consider reasonalble.
>
>Im all in favor of bringing back and legalizing dueling. Then I could
>call you out.
>
>Sledge hammers in say..6' of water perhaps?

Classic short story by Zaroff, "The Most Dangerous Game," where a
marooned couple are released, then hunted by a sportsman with rifle
and dogs. Guess who survived?
>
>
>---
>This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>https://www.avast.com/antivirus
--- NewsGate v1.0 gamma 2
* Origin: News Gate @ Net396 -Huntsville, AL - USA (1:396/4)

From: Dim Witte (1:396/4)
To: n/a
Date: Sun, 29.07.18 07:36
Re: What sane 2nd Ammendment?
From: Dim Witte

On Sun, 29 Jul 2018 17:00:53 -0700, Winston_Smith
wrote:

>On Sat, 28 Jul 2018 23:34:26 -0800, Dim Witte wrote:
>>On Sat, 28 Jul 2018 22:45:32 -0700, Winston_Smith wrote:
>
>>>>Not reasonable that civilians in a hometown guard have really advanced
>>>>weapons used by military,
>>>
>>>Bull####.
>>
>>Well, I suppose an argument could be that snipers and fire-bombers are
>>only trying to survive, so that means military forces are justified in
>>taking whatever steps deemed necessary, maybe burning you out with
>>napalm?
>
>I realize you like to play the provocateur troll but if that's really
>the depth of your understanding of the writings of the founding
>fathers on the subject, you have a lot of reading to catch up on.

Considering how short the 2nd Amendment is and the archaic key words,
I wonder that your " understanding" is based on ambiguity rather than
definition of terms. Supposed to be objective, not depend on
"founding fathers," whatever that is.
--- NewsGate v1.0 gamma 2
* Origin: News Gate @ Net396 -Huntsville, AL - USA (1:396/4)

ABOUT

This forum contains echomail areas hosted on Nightmare BBS You can browse local echomail areas, italian fidonet areas and a selection of international fidonet areas, reading messages posted by users in Nightmare BBS or even other BBSs all over the world. You can find file areas too (functional to fidonet technology). You can browse echomail areas and download files with no registration, but if you want to write messages in echomail areas, or use fidonet netmail (private messages with fidomet technology), you have to register. Only a minimal set of data is required, functional to echomail and netmail usage (name, password, email); a registration and login with facebook is provided too, to allow easy registration. If you won't follow rules (each echomail areas has its own, regularly posted in the echomail), your account may be suspended;

CONTACT