alt.politics.economics

Nicklas@ wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 14:04:28 -0600, David Hartung
> wrote:
>
>> Nicklas@ wrote:
>>> On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 09:01:16 -0600, David Hartung
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Hartung thinks everyone has a right to carry a gun
>>>>> wherever they want to.
>>>> That's the basic message of the Second Amendment.
>>> No, it is not
>>>
>>> The "Basic message", crafted in rural, agrarian, 18th
>>> century, suggested that every individual should be
>>> ready to help a small, frail central government enforce
>>> military-type duties against foriegn enemies and
>>> outlying attacks.
>>>
>>> The second "underlying message" was reflected in the
>>> fact that IF a central government became "large" (which
>>> it was not at the time) like European governments, it
>>> was put into writing THEY (the government) could not
>>> pass laws that set themselves up to thwart a "rule of
>>> law".
>>>
>>> But WE devised a "rule of law" (constitution) that
>>> addressed ALL the known "grievances" which would
>>> logically preclude having to use "guns" to force
>>> government to stay within the bounds of that contract
>>> with the people
>>>
>>> Blanket "everyone gets a gun" nonsense is stupid,
>>> Hartung
>>>
>>> States DO have the right to pass gun laws
>>>
>>> THey have for generations
>>>
>>> That negates ANY "literal reading " of the 2nd
>>> Amendment.
>> So, you can make the Constitution mean whatever you wish?
>
> Hartung---YOU seem to think YOU can interpret the
> constutition anyway YOU think it should be---despite
> the logical arguments of WHY the amendment was written,
> when it was written and the venue in which it pertained
> when written---then skip 220 some odd years and apply
> it "literally"

How is that different from your rather creative interpretations?