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

To: Lazamataz

Sorry, I don’t buy it. There is nothing in the Constitution to prevent me from owning a nuke. At the time, probably the most destructive weapon was a cannon and private people DID own cannons. When they put these cannons on their private ships, they were called privateers.


11 posted on 04/16/2007 7:49:16 AM PDT by rhombus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: rhombus
Sorry, I don’t buy it.

If you don't agree with me, I'm detonating this nuke.

19 posted on 04/16/2007 7:51:10 AM PDT by Lazamataz (Can’t the liberals start their own countries somewhere, and then surrender?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: rhombus

I might have to disagree.

In the Federalist Papers there is a quote about how freedom would remain as long as the common citizen had the same access to arms as the common soldier.

So I take that to mean machine guns and rockets are in and nukes and mustard gas are out.


26 posted on 04/16/2007 7:53:59 AM PDT by Kilt Dad ("Among the other evils being unarmed brings you, it causes you to be despised")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: rhombus
I agree and there is nothing that says a weapon must be discriminating.
62 posted on 04/16/2007 8:24:05 AM PDT by OldEagle (May you live long enough to hear the legends of your own adventures.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | 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