-CraZed- said:
sundin13 said:
Sounds to me like this guy was in the wrong and created a big fuss leading to the law enforcement backing out because it wasn't worth the effort. I don't see why I should be on his side...
Additionally, the right to bear arms means something very different now than when the constitution was drafted and I honestly don't see any need why people would need certain types of guns. Yeah, pistols and hunting gear is fine but any further than that and you are infringing on other people's freedom to protect your own.
|
So I'm guessing all the other amendments mean something different now as well? Search and seizure? Free speech rights?
|
Er, pardon? I apologize for pointing this out but you don't make much sense. There is a reason why the right to bear arms is so heavily debated and it is because the definition of "arms" has changed and it is uncertain where the line of "acceptable arms" lays. Please explain your point other than throwing out unrelated remarks. I am willing to discuss if you stay reasonable
