09-11-2004, 08:58 PM
Mad Wrote:Those so called sources have the most subjective reasons. Therefore, they're not historically accurate in their opinions.any research that supports one side or another is going to be subjective, moron. just as the sites you mention are subjective. your sites arguments are using logic that are no longer meaningful as the government and populace that existed when the amendment was written no longer are the same creature and therefore the argument is irrelevant.
The Embarrassing Second Amendment
If you read through the whole thing there are footnotes which back up the legal reasoning. As well as support the true intent of the founding of this country.
I love him. He's like those happy old people who become known for sitting by the side of a busy street and waving to passing cars. People drive by regularly and beep just to see him and get him to wave to them.
That's just like our Arpi... except he doesn't wave or anything. He just says mean things to you.
Nominated for," 2005 poster of the year", by 4 out of 6 mods!
That's just like our Arpi... except he doesn't wave or anything. He just says mean things to you.
GonzoStyle Wrote:I pledge my undying love for Arpi, any retraction of this undying love is to be ignored.
Nominated for," 2005 poster of the year", by 4 out of 6 mods!