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

To: robertpaulsen
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v47/dallas59/Post%20pics/KMA.gif

No. There wasn't anything to "belief" about it. The document clearly states that a review of history, original intent, and linguistic structure, all support the view that it protects an individual Right.

Of course, if you'd actually read it, you'd know that.

What would keep a future administration from coming up with their own documentation to the contrary would be the history, original intent, and linguistic structure of the Second Amendment and the supporting documentation.

191 posted on 07/24/2006 6:46:48 AM PDT by Dead Corpse (It is not the oath that makes us believe the man, but the man the oath.- Aeschylus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 190 | View Replies ]


To: Dead Corpse
"What would keep a future administration from coming up with their own documentation to the contrary would be the history, original intent, and linguistic structure of the Second Amendment and the supporting documentation."

All they'd have to do is simply copy the text from Judge Reinhardt's 70-page opinion in Silveira v. Lockyer.

193 posted on 07/24/2006 7:07:27 AM PDT by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 191 | 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