🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1nrm3eINNb05@sol.tis.com> mjr@tis.com (Marcus J Ranum) writes:
>>>	Perhaps you were just making a funny based on "the army exists
>>>to kill people with guns, so why talk about gun control" - even that
>>
>>No, the irony is in the fact that if the pro-control people have
>>their way, the army will be the only ones with the guns.
>
>	Crap. If I need to I can make a fuel-propelled hand weapon
>in a few days. Take away my guns and you haven't disarmed me because
>I have knowledge. There is NO WAY that the army are going to be the
>only ones with the guns. Criminals will always have access to guns.
>I just don't feel comfortable with that access being as easy as it
>is today.

Take away my *right* to arms and the Federal Government might just decide
to consider my home manufacture operation an act of *war*, and all of a
sudden it's either the government or me. Should we have to risk treason
charges to stand up for our rights?


-- 
==========================================================================
That which is necessary is never evil. If an evil seems necessary, look
to your context; that's where its root lies.