Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: justshutupandtakeit
Apparently you are under the false impression I either said cannons were illegal or should be. In actuality I merely said they are not covered under the 2d which clearly specifies "arms" not artillery. That is what started the whole cannon controversy in which my point has not been refuted.

Apparently you can't remember what you wrote.

In #118 you attempted to convey that cannons were not covered by the Second Amendment. In support of this assertion you offered evidence by stating that "Cannons were not owned by individuals during the Revolution what concoction of crap did you get that gem from?"

I merely called you on your absolute lack of knowledge of history. However, since those earlier posts I checked your page and note you claim a minor in history. Fiven this pedigree that you allege, your proffered "proof" could be simply a material misrepresentation on your part instead of arising from total ignorance of history.

I also am enjoying your attempt to evade the issue of the Constitutionality of Welfare around about #220. All that after telling NMC that he couldn't pass your constitutional test...

Maybe he could pass it because you wouldn't recognize the correct answers?

I'm afraid to keep reading through this thread - I might die from laughter.

531 posted on 11/18/2003 11:00:02 AM PST by Abundy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 528 | View Replies ]


To: Abundy
Nah, I'm sure your constitution can take it.

I clarified that comment by acknowledging the fact that privately owned ships were armed with cannons. It is still true that individuals rarely, if ever, owned cannons for use on land. Those were almost entirely the possession of militias and armies and are not "arms" as specified in the Second amendment. ARMS were carried. Cannons cannot be carried unless you are Paul Bunyan.

I didn't evade anything about Welfare merely mentioned the Court rulings wrt the 14th amendment preventing States from restricting its dispersal. For a lawyer you seem to have a singular inability to separate a comment from a desire. Just because I say something happened or was the case does not mean that I am glad it was so or wished it would be so.

Any information about the private ownership of cannons during the Revolutionary period (other than on ships) will be welcomed.
536 posted on 11/18/2003 11:10:56 AM PST by justshutupandtakeit (America's Enemies foreign and domestic agree: Bush must be destroyed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 531 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson