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

To: Lazamataz
Missed your resonse while composing my question. Sorry.

Private warships satisified the discrimination test well, in those open seas.

Where is a warship limited to open sea use or of using only conventional weapons? Even then a warship could threaten a land-based fort or port and there was nothing then that prevented shelling from killing non-combatants or the such.

Chivalry, honor, rules of engagement, honor etc. may have prevented or limited the use or effect of some weapons systems then but I see nothing in the Constitution that prevents them. Machine guns and artillery are only as discriminating as the operators and the ammo used.

The Constitution does not have a threshold for discrimination and neither you nor the author of the article can insert one.

89 posted on 04/18/2002 12:56:13 PM PDT by Eagle Eye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies ]


To: Eagle Eye
Then I take it you hold the position that releasing smallpox against your attacker and causing an pandemic that eliminates 200,000,000 Americans is perfectly Constitutional.

I guess you and I will have to agree to disagree.

90 posted on 04/18/2002 1:04:44 PM PDT by Lazamataz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | 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