Not sure/it depends
BTW you can own a vehicle yet not drive it, negating the need for a drivers license. In fact if you lose your licence you may still own a vehicle. But if you kill someone whether it was with a firearm or not you lose the right to own a firearm. But both methods can kill mass amounts of people with ease. WHere are all these people when it comes to vehicles why are they not calling for their ban?
Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.
Last edited by Henrin; 07-26-14 at 09:09 PM.
My point is, the founders specification was entirely reasonable within the framework of the concept of The Social Contract. Militia/infantry arms are within ones private right to defense, personal and national. More extensive weaponry is best kept in the hands of the people through the system we've established, given Western liberal democracy.
I'm pretty sure the terms of the contracts were pretty important to their authors, but ok, lets just ignore them and go with the idea we give up something for the group. That is surely upholding the contract.
Let me know when you've negotiated new treaties. We wouldn't want the government taking away your freedom to do so.
Last edited by Bob Blaylock; 07-26-14 at 09:17 PM. Reason: May Laurence Tureaud have compassion toward you. — http://tinyurl.com/LaurenceTureaud
The five great lies of the
We can be Godless and free. • “Social justice” through forced redistribution of wealth. • Silencing religious opinions counts as “diversity”. • Freedom without moral and personal responsibility. • Civilization can survive the intentional undermining of the family.