yep exactly Fred

__________________
Funny looking German Subaru

Good point there Dave. But as Fred has said, times have changed and documents made decades ago are losing their relevance.
Current opinion does not support war, but given one or two more attacks and some propaganda, I think the US war machine will be pumping....
Merely an opinion though, and it'll be interesting to see how the US reacts.

Fertilizer plant in Texas just went up in flames resulting in a MASSIVE explosion once water combined with ammonia nitrate. 70 dead, scores injured. Not sure why there are residential buildings so close to a volatile factory, but it has flattened a shitload of nearby buildings.

__________________
[I]trolololol[/I]

World is a messed up place. We are lucky to live here.

Documents like the refugee convention we signed to help people fleeing in WWII in 1951? No longer relevant and should be torn up/amended.

__________________
Bush chook enthusiast

Farking huge bang.

I politely disagree ... the right to bears arms was written to allow the people to oppose a repressive government. If the police/military have the right to automatic weapons then so should the people.

I would call the various homeland security acts written after 9/11 to be repressive.




On the thread subject:

Boston Bombing Culprits

__________________
[COLOR=Black]Liberty GT Spec B tuned 240 HP & 372 Nm at the hubs.[/COLOR] "Instead of banning high performance cars - ban low performance drivers"

So bill of rights is there to allow civil war?

Slightly off topic but in the vein of gun control - I think this article sums up the failure of the US Senate to act. I find it amazing that they don't want to close such an obvious loophole on background checks.

__________________
273.2whp / 203.7kw / 371.2nm @ 17psi. Verso tune by ASG.

This right was described by Blackstone as an auxiliary right, supporting the natural rights of self-defense, resistance to oppression, and the civic duty to act in concert in defense of the state.

2nd Amendment to the US Constitution

So effectively, yes it is to allow resistance from oppression (of say the government) but also to allow the duty to act in defence of the state (government). It was well written and designed to ensure that the leaders in government act to support their constituents so that they would continue to support their government.

I would say that in the 21st century the US government is failing in its support of its constituents for the benefit of corporations and their lobbyists.

__________________
[COLOR=Black]Liberty GT Spec B tuned 240 HP & 372 Nm at the hubs.[/COLOR] "Instead of banning high performance cars - ban low performance drivers"

NRA

__________________
Funny looking German Subaru