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

To: robertpaulsen

"Then who would define that arm?"

An arm in this context is a weapon. A weapon is an object utilized to defend oneself on the streets of America, in our homes, and as soldiers in war. What definition are you seeking beyond a limit to arms? Should we prevent citizens from owing nukes? Is that where you are going? Ok, can you afford one? Can any of your friends afford one? And if they can, are they prepared to become radioactive and die themselves when they mis-handle it?

As a citizen of these United States, the 2nd Amendment allows me to decide and define the arm I choose to protect my family. Not the states, nor subsequent laws passed by the fed which restrict the choice of weapon.


1,002 posted on 03/10/2007 11:11:48 PM PST by takenoprisoner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 994 | View Replies ]


To: takenoprisoner
We were discussing the US v Miller case, remember? The U.S. Supreme Court remanded the case to the lower court because they had no evidence that the weapon had a relationship to a militia.

I said it was up to a state to make that determination and testify to that effect. You said BS.

I'm asking you a very simple question. If not the state, then who should testify in the lower court that the weapon in question bore a relationship to a militia?

1,028 posted on 03/11/2007 8:29:36 AM PDT by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1002 | 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