[B5JMS] Gore's speech re civil liberty

[b5jms at cs.columbia.edu]

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: Anson Macdonald <anson_macdonald at comcast.net>
Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 14:54:07 +0000 (UTC)
Lines: 42

Mickey wrote:

> Anson Macdonald <anson_macdonald at comcast.net> wrote in message news:<vNCdnSvIFc2lDS-iRVn-uA at comcast.com>...
> 
>>What, is Gore moaning about the Patriot Act again? 
> 
> 
> Imagine the nerve of the man, protesting against the loss of
> constitutional rights... what WAS he thinking....
> 
> 

You missed the point.  The nerve of the man, pretending to be a civil 
libertarian when there are plenty of civil liberties to which he is opposed.


> 
>>In any case, if Gore had been elected in 
>>2000, he would be eroding civil liberties, too.  Especially the ones 
>>that aren't politically correct.
> 
> 
> Easy to say, but do you have an IOTA of proof to support this claim?
> 
> 

I certainly do.  Gore's platform included more gun control.  Gun control 
violates the Second Amendment, which guarantees the Right to Keep and 
Bear Arms, which is indeed a civil liberty.


>>The democrats are not the defenders of civil liberties they claim to be.
> 
> 
> Nor are the Republicans, so what IS your point?
> 

The point is, neither party is defending ALL of our civil liberties.





=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: jmsatb5 at aol.com (Jms at B5)
Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 14:21:00 +0000 (UTC)
Lines: 37

>Gore's platform included more gun control.  Gun control 
>violates the Second Amendment, which guarantees the Right to Keep and 
>Bear Arms, which is indeed a civil liberty.
>

Let's be more specific.  What it actually says is:

"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the
right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

First, the rights invoked refer specifically to "a well regulated militia." 
Anti-gun law advocates tend to omit that part of the sentence out, as you did
just above.

Second, most of what's been advocated is simple gun registration, which dose
not interfere itself with the ability to keep and bear arms.

Third, bear in mind that some of the Al Qaeda docs that surfaced during the
campaign refer to the fact that those working inside the US should purchase
guns legally, not buy them off the street, because they're so easy to obtain
here.  The resultant theory is that good gun registration laws could help to
prevent the use of such guns by, say, terrorists.

But the administration is too busy prying into your choice of books at the
library to look into who's buying weapons that can, oh, I dunno...kill people.

 jms

(jmsatb5 at aol.com)
(all message content (c) 2003 by synthetic worlds, ltd., 
permission to reprint specifically denied to SFX Magazine 
and don't send me story ideas)