Xref: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu alt.politics.usa.constitution:2061 talk.politics.guns:55081
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!crabapple.srv.cs.cmu.edu!fs7.ece.cmu.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!noc.near.net!transfer.stratus.com!sw.stratus.com!cdt
From: cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.usa.constitution,talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Rewording the Second Amendment (ideas)
Date: 22 Apr 1993 18:22:07 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.
Lines: 17
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <1r6nof$64f@transfer.stratus.com>
References: <C5sCu3.8xG@cbnewsc.cb.att.com> <C5vB3E.Ev5@sugar.neosoft.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: rocket.sw.stratus.com

In article <C5vB3E.Ev5@sugar.neosoft.com>, kunkee@NeoSoft.com (Randy Kunkee) writes:

> Perhaps we are a little off track.  The discussion was about rewording
> the 2nd amendment.  This specifically refers to the right to bear arms.
> "Bear" and "arms" are key words here, no?  Is it too simplistic to say
> that if you can't pick it up (ie. bear it), or if it is not a firearm
> then it can be restricted without amending the constitution.

Firearm?  Let's not even consider long knives (swords), which were also
common militia weapons in the 18th century, and which, if anything, are
often restricted more heavily than firearms.  Whatever sense gun control
makes, knife control makes even less.
-- 

cdt@rocket.sw.stratus.com   --If you believe that I speak for my company,
OR cdt@vos.stratus.com        write today for my special Investors' Packet...

