🚀 go-pugleaf

 
>    I shall do a little research for the citations you request.  Got
>    a few questions for you though. If the constitution grants the
>    right to bear arms and the right to vote is also guranteed,
>    why are convicted felons denied the right to own weapons and
>    vote????  Ask you local felon about that one or even better go to
>    a reputable gun store and tell them you are convicted felon and  
>    want to buy a CAR-15.  The military has a stricter code of law than
>    civilians and you think they will let a military reject that gets
>    a dishonorable discharge vote?  Funny.
> 

I hadn't thought about this, but it does cause one to consider the
randomness with which liberals interpret our constitution.  They seem to
want to *absolutely* bar any kind of cruel or unusual punishment of
criminals (ref. the recent uproar over the caning of the chap in Singapore
and all the dialog regarding punishment here), yet they simultaneously wish
to *interpret* the second amendment and read things into it (or out of it)
at will.  At last check, the 2nd didn't say anything about infringing the
right to bear arms for some while not infringing said right for others.  It
is not an amendment which is open to interpretation.  It is clear, and its
intent is clear.