Fragments of quotes taken out of context convey little, and thus get rated low...

Nice thought, but it has to reach too far for those analogies...

"Think" is not the key, heck the lowest form of citizen (e.g. people like Bush) "think", the problem is that they do not "think clearly", that their logic is fuzzy and perverted.

The evidence in Kansas & Penn. is in, and it holds forth the truth of which Robert speaks (other than his use of the word "liberal", as "educated" does not make one "liberal", but rather "true independant"... who sees the need for a balanced society).

and yet there are those who have great power with out having any love for power, and as such it disproves the "necessary" part of the quote. Other than that, this seems like a reasonable statement.

The words in the amendment are not the same as the words in this quote. As with all politics, often it is a process of compromise. That this person may have wanted it to say this is not important, what is important is what was actually said in the amendment and what the collective ratification process felt they were ratifiying.

"A well regulated Militia" is not a bunch of individuals running around with glocks and rocket launchers (e.g. note the state of Iraq). Nothing in this amendment justifies a lack of regulation on gun ownership.

We are only sovereign nobles within the bounds of our own home, not when we travel in public where it is the collective people who are the sovereigns. So if you must have your guns, keep them in your homes, not on our streets, in our bars, and in our churches (etc)... and while we are at it, lets tax the hell out of their sale, as they are a vice just as drink and tobacco and gasoline are, and thus the societal costs should be borne by those who are inflicting them upon the rest of us.

This quote is marvelous, as it reveals that our founding fathers did NOT assume that ALL should have access to arms! From the start, it was assumed that there will be "A well regulated militia" not a mob of individuals with arms. "the right of the people" refers to a collective right, not a individual right.

Reno is exactly right on this point, as evidenced by the wacko defense attempted to justify personal ownership of every weapon under the sun... when will they try to claim that personal ownership of nuclear weapons is a must to protect their homes and lives? The only problem with the quote is that it does not tell us what IS enough...

The two issues are not directly related to each other... thus the quote is nothing more than mindless babbling of a confused fool.

And just to be clear here, by "gun" we don't mean hunting rifles and shotguns either... they are fine, though they too must be kept from the overly young and the troubled of any age.

It is not the gun that is bad... as he said "a gun in the hands of a bad man is a bad thing", but he is 100% wrong when he claims that in the hands of a good man it is not a threat... too many have died by accidents caused by good (but dim witted &/or lazy) people who do not control access to those weapons to keep them from children, troubled teens and the "bad people" (LOL, yet another "them" ;-).

While I agree with Robert's assessment of the state of the many wacko groups within America today... I can not see any value to personal ownership of Glocks & automatic weapons & rocket launchers (etc). It hasn't helped in Iraq or Afganistan, and it hasn't helped in America since our own rebelion in the mid-1700s either. We established methods to control those problems when we organized our country... now we just have to use them rather than letting them rot & fester (as Florida and Ohio let them be taken over by power mad wacko control groups such as the GOP).

"God's laws" are really nothing more than the laws of some people, for "God" is nothing more than an invention of some people attempting to understand and explain that which was beyond them... to make sense of that which they could not grok.

Sounds too much like the hate spewed by today's King George...

Alcohol is simply not sufficiently taxed... and nicotine use is not only insufficiently taxed, but also is insufficiently regulated (as the politicians are in big-tobacco's pockets)... if these were both more heavilly taxed and regulated (e.g. don't subject the non-smoker to your second hand smoke, etc), then they should continue to be legal... as should most (if not all) drug use, sex of any form (between consenting adults, protection of children is still of value... and besides "sex" with children is NOT sex! It is more of a control thing... you know, like big-business imposes upon all of the rest of us).

What great fun that woman would have been to know...

so what... these facists had many strange views... personally, keep your smoke to yourself and do not subject me to it and you are then free to do it all you want... but since it costs society dearly, society shoudl tax the living hell out of it...

Prohibition has never worked and never will... keep these vices legal, and legalize most of the rest too (drugs, sex, etc)... and tax the hell out of them (just like we should with gasoline!).

The time is here... down with King George!

And unfortunately, even as great as Congresses violations have been, they pale in the shadow of those of King George...

If only these patriots were there to fight for our country in 1994, 2000 and 2004, then we wouldn't have to suffer under King George today and watch as our constitution and country are raped and pillaged.

A good thought, but the two are really orthogonal...

Good judges yes, sadly King George has stacked the benches with those who rule based upon their personal opinions (and those of the King and his maker, Jester Rove).