To: ThanhPhero
The right to keep and bear, as it is worded, is absolute.
I have a right to keep nuclear weapons in my garage.
That does not provide me the financing to keep nuclear weapons in my garage, however.
455 ThanhPhero
Nor does it protect you from lawsuits for damage done to your neighbors and property due to improper storage. Nor from any "after effects" of your Day at the Range. Nor does it coerce or put any onus on your insurance company to continue insuring you. Etc...
Much more to it that just going out and plopping a few million down on a low yield tactical nuke.
458 Dead
ThanhPhero wrote:
That is how it reads.
Sure, the way the 2nd reads, the right to keep and bear, as it is worded, is absolute.
You have a right to keep a nuclear weapon in your garage, -- if you can insure that keeping it there will never harm your neighbors. -- Big IF. --
You can't insure [nor can the feds] that you can keep a nuke safely [even if your garage was in the middle of umpteen sq miles of Nevada desert] --
-- Therefore, we have reasonable regulations on the storage and use of unstable C/N/B agents, [or even large amounts of conventional explosives & fuel].
These 'regs' have nothing to do with our right to keep arms. They are based on common sense common law.
But of course, the Sarah Brady's among us don't want to face up to common sense. They want to ban all arms.
472 posted on
01/21/2005 4:59:17 PM PST by
jonestown
( A fanatic is a person who can't change his mind and won't change the subject." ~ Winston Churchill)
To: jonestown
Again, well said. The insurance rates alone would bankrupt even Donald Trump.
473 posted on
01/22/2005 9:09:04 AM PST by
Dead Corpse
(Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson