CDR: Re: Here's an interesting twist on gun control ...

[Bill Stewart]

At 10:44 PM 11/5/00 -0600, Mac Norton wrote:
>Again we have one of those few occasions in which Tim and I 
>are in perfect agreement.  To require gun ownership just 
>because "arms" or "militia" is in the Constitution makes
>as much sense as requiring us all to have a press just
>because "press" is in the Constitution.

While I agree with this, most states and cities not only require you
to have guns, they require you to hire guys in blue suits to
carry them around.  Back when we had state militias, 
people were often required to be part of them,
and the Feds still require you to sign up for the draft
so they can tell you to carry them and shoot their enemies
in places like Vietnam if they can't get enough volunteers.
The only difference here is they're giving you a bit more choice
on who you shoot and when....

But then, if the War Between The States was really about slavery,
why did Lincoln use conscript troops to fight it?
(The Secession was to prevent slavery from being banned,
but the War was to enforce nationalism.)

But yeah, it was tacky for Kennesaw Georgia to make their law,
and it's tacky for this part of Utah to do so.

"You have the right to own a gun.
If you do not own a gun, one will be provided for you."

Or, as Woody Guthrie said about the draft,
"Well, they can make me carry a gun, but they can't
tell me which way to point it."




				Thanks! 
					Bill
Bill Stewart, bill.stewart at pobox.com
PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF  3C85 B884 0ABE 4639