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

To: Texaggie79
...the intended use of a hard drug is a threat to those around the user, therefore a violation of their rights.

The intended use of a hard drug guns is a threat to those around the user, therefore a violation of their rights.

The intended use of a hard drug religion is a threat to those around the user, therefore a violation of their rights.

The intended use of a hard drug speech is a threat to those around the user, therefore a violation of their rights.

352 posted on 06/15/2002 2:01:41 PM PDT by Alan Chapman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 341 | View Replies ]


To: Alan Chapman
All three are guaranteed rights bud.............
355 posted on 06/15/2002 2:02:15 PM PDT by Texaggie79
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 352 | View Replies ]

To: Alan Chapman
The intended use of a guns is a threat to those around the user, therefore a violation of their rights.

All human activities have societal consequences. The implication that all activities are "essential liberties" is juvenile nonsense.

The "right" to use crack doesn't equal the right to keep and bear arms.

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." --Benjamin Franklin

Franklin wasn't a simpleton.

356 posted on 06/15/2002 2:07:19 PM PDT by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 352 | 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