Originally Posted by mgburg

FOLKS!

First: When the Constitution & Bill of Rights was written, many forms of "policing" were going on back in the 1700s. Confiscation of property, without legal reason or recourse was SOP. When you READ the Constitution and related documents, you must ALSO realize the context in which it was inspired and written. Failure to even understand the basics of the reason for such documents breeds illogical conclusions and further discussion is inane.

Second: As any knowledgeable individual knows, you can't build a house on a crappy foundation. Therefore, knowledge of WHY the Constitution was written and the conditions that formed the related documents is VITAL in any discussion of the subject. By applying TODAYS' values and standards on such a wonderful document without a proper backround of understanding of why the original document was written is folly. That's why these types of "discussions" do nothing but go 'round and 'round and get to no conclusion.

THE ANSWER? WE, THE PEOPLE, must get off our "bums" and start reading and understanding the very documents we profess to love and hold dear to our hearts. You don't have to be some smart**s Yale, or Harvard, Yuppie-Tree-Hugging-Anti-Republican-Anarchist-Baby-Slasher-History-Revisionist to understand the Constitution. It was written by men, to be read by men and understood by men (Women can enjoy it too!). What bothers the courts more than anything else is that a document (Or the series of documents) can be so simple. They (The courts) want everyone to think it's more complicated than it really is. It really isn't.

THE JOB? Ask any lawyer, "When you were in Pre-law School, and even during Law School itself, how much time did you actully spend reading and studing the Constitution and the Bill of Rights?" The majority of them will probably say, "About eight hours." Some may say more, but I seriously doubt that it will be an extraordinary figure. (Unless, of course, that particular lawyer is actually a Constitutional Law instructor some place!)

As for this particular discussion, I'm weighing in on the side of the NRA and the peoples' right to bear arms. The state (Either the Federal Government or the State government) have been prohibited from confiscating legal firearms.

Thank you for this opportunity to throw, hopefully, some water on this smoldering discussion.

Now, go home and study. Saner discussions may be forthcoming.