In response to:

The Complex Truth About the Second Amendment

Mike25 Wrote: Feb 14, 2013 9:41 AM
Steve, you're not from around here, are you? You sound completely uncomfortable in a conservative environment. History shows over and over that gun registration provides the groundwork for confiscation. If you don't trust American conservative publications, try reading Pravda instead- they warn us very clearly not to fall into the trap that you and the statists are setting. It is NOT reasonable to ban one type of gun because substitutes are readily available: quite apart from the "shall not be infringed" bit, criminalizing a commonly owned gun leads to criminalizing current owners who committed no crime by obtaining them. In case you missed it, the constitution explicitly bans ex post facto legislation. There is no compromise on principles
Mike25 Wrote: Feb 14, 2013 9:47 AM
And, btw, I'm British, like piers Morgan, but not stupid like him.
I believe in defending our 'rights as englishmen' the way our founders defined them, and the way they tried to encode te best of the magma carat and the unwritten rights of British citizens into a constitution that government could not subvert.

Also see http://granitegrok.com/blog/2012/12/they-cant-criminalize-us-after-the-fact-ex-post-facto-legislation-prohibited
Mike25 Wrote: Feb 14, 2013 9:47 AM
And, btw, I'm British, like piers Morgan, but not stupid like him.
I believe in defending our 'rights as englishmen' the way our founders defined them, and the way they tried to encode te best of the magma carat and the unwritten rights of British citizens into a constitution that government could not subvert.

Also see http://granitegrok.com/blog/2012/12/they-cant-criminalize-us-after-the-fact-ex-post-facto-legislation-prohibited
Mike25 Wrote: Feb 14, 2013 9:44 AM
And, btw, I'm British, like piers Morgan, but not stupid like him.
I believe in defending our 'rights as englishmen' the way our founders defined them, and the way they tried to encode te best of the magma carat and the unwritten rights of British citizens into a constitution that government could not subvert.
George1026 Wrote: Feb 14, 2013 9:54 AM
Yes, and Britain established the right to keep and bear arms by law in the English Bill of Rights, which stood until 1996 when the Labour government ended that right and left British subjects defenseless.

The debate on gun control lately has been going like this: Liberals propose various restrictions on allowable firearms, acceptable owners and approved ammunition. Conservatives exclaim, "Second Amendment!" And the debate, at least in the mind of the latter group, is over.

The Second Amendment, they believe, is not just one important provision of our basic government document. It's the first and last word on the subject of firearms.

Viewing the proposals offered since the Sandy Hook massacre, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., concludes the supporters intend "to completely GUT our Second Amendment rights." The Utah Sheriffs' Association warned President Barack...