[Magdalen] right to bear arms

[Jay Weigel]

Beat me to it, Scott. Anyway, the founding fathers were also talking about
muskets and single-shot rifles, not semi-automatic weapons, and a
well-regulated militia, which assumes something more like the National
Guard, not a bunch of goons running around loose on the streets with those
weapons.

On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 5:46 PM, Scott Knitter <scottknitter at gmail.com>
wrote:

> The right was assumed in the Three-Fifths Compromise. Take away the
> free persons, "Indians," and those bound to Service for a Term of
> Years, and who's left? "three fifths of all other Persons." Art. 1,
> Sec. 2, Par. 3
>
> On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 4:12 PM, Sibyl Smirl <polycarpa3 at ckt.net> wrote:
> > On 12/10/15 10:07 PM, James Oppenheimer-Crawford wrote:
> >>
> >> Just read a wonderful thought.
> >>
> >> Back when they wrote the Constitution,
> >> the Founding Fathers said you could own a gun.
> >> They also said you could own people.
> >>
> >> Dang. Why didn't *I* think of that?
> >
> >
> > Our brother Louie put around a photo with that quote on Facebook
> yesterday
> > (In very poor grammar (Ebonics?  the photo was of a young Black man of
> whom
> > I've never heard otherwise, but then I'm not up on a lot of "pop
> culture": I
> > find it hard to believe that an English teacher sent that around).
> >
> > Anyway, the big hole in the quote is that there isn't _anything_ in the
> > Constitution or the Bill of Rights (which is part of the Constitution)
> about
> > a Right to own people.  Whoever said it first ("Michael Che?" IIRC) knew
> as
> > little about the Constitution as he did about grammar.
> >
> >
> > --
> > Sibyl Smirl
> > I will take no bull from your house!  Psalms 50:9a
> > mailto:polycarpa3 at ckt.net
>
>
>
> --
> Scott R. Knitter
> Edgewater, Chicago, Illinois USA
>