Down to the Fourth Estate
POSTED BY: FutureMrsFIllion
UPDATED: Friday, May 26, 2006 00:45
VIEWED: 3769
PAGE 4 of 4
And of course the people wouldn't stand for it. Wouldn't make excuse about exceptional circumstances and "they're only going after the bad guys".
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
"I had a rose named after me and I was very flattered. But I was not pleased to read the description in the catalog: 'No good in a bed, but fine against a wall'." -- Eleanor Roosevelt.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
A carbine is a smaller less powerful version of rifles or muskets, since muskets have just been mentioned it’s pretty obvious that the carbines mentioned are muskets.
But by a literal interpretation anything that goes by the name carbine would be acceptable even if it did not match the original meaning. Therefore the modern day carbines should fall under the law.
Quote:
Oh and since modern artillery includes tactical nuclear shells (and arguably warheads of the missile variety) really if you want to start reinterpreting the literal interpretation of muskets and flintlocks to M16's and Glock 9mm then you have to do the same for artillery pieces...And if you really think letting individuals own Nuclear weapons is a good idea...
Why wouldn't it be?
Quote:
EDIT: Sorry just noticed it wasn't originally your post. It's all your fault for having screen names that start with the same letter, obviously.
Actually fremdfirma and I have been planning this for years just to confuse you MWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Well no.
But by a literal interpretation anything that goes by the name carbine would be acceptable even if it did not match the original meaning. Therefore the modern day carbines should fall under the law.
Literally the text is referring to carbine versions of the weapons of the day. It's literally referring to muskets.
You’re reinterpreting the text literally in a modern context, a context it wasn't written in. So it is not a literal interpretation, it's a reinterpretation.
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
"I had a rose named after me and I was very flattered. But I was not pleased to read the description in the catalog: 'No good in a bed, but fine against a wall'." -- Eleanor Roosevelt.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Just a comment about third party politcs- When you have a near 50/50 voting split a third party has BOTH parties by the balls.
Want to talk about power??? A credible third-party threat of 5% could have the party of their choice licking out of their hand. In a Presidential election, that third party could either sway the platform of a party to attract more (third party) voters or (better yet) trade their votes for Cabinet-level appointments.
The real problem is in Congress. Thanks to comfortable redistricting, most Congressional districts votes are not anywhere near 50/50, so a third-party would need somewhere in the realm of 20% in order to threaten a major party condidate. Perhaps that is where Dreamtrove's plan of influencing the primaries comes in. Sicne most primary votes are sparse, a third-party push could make a HUGE difference in the outcome.
Of course, all of the votes would have to be counted....
---------------------------------
Don't piss in my face and tell me it's raining.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME