Well, yes. And no. It was also about protecting one's right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of hapiness-- which includes protecting one's self and family.
There are guns over 100 years old that function perfectly. Bullets only have about a 5-year shelf life. Think about which one is easier to regulate...
Posted by:
Victor Agreda Jr on August 29, 2006 07:10 PM
Really? That qualifies as excellent? Guns help weaker women against stronger men, criminals don't pay attention to laws, the 2nd am. actually says this. ZZzzzzzz.
Then the closer about the government being afraid of the citizenry... with no lead-in to that or how that would work out in the modern age?
I think you are confusing "I like the message of this" with something being great. There's a lot of good ground they could have covered on either side but they didn't look in depth at either side's argument.
Posted by:
Don on August 29, 2006 08:01 PM
CleverPatriot,
Look at Iraq right now, a group of people are able to stand up to the full force of the American Government. They don't have tanks or jets, the have guns and home-made bombs. Modern warfare isn't just about firepower, it is not about "putting steal on target" as the armor guys would say. Modern warfare is about winning hearts and minds, it's about protecting people's life, liberty and property, in that order.
Posted by:
Grant Henninger on August 29, 2006 10:44 PM
Post A Comment