Great! So you DO allow for some interpretation except with the tired and dead analogies of course.CID1990 wrote:No, the inference you are making is of your own invention.kalm wrote:
Hard left?
I'm only questioning the constitutional consistency here. I own a few of the 300 million guns in this country. Our right to own those ain't going away. I get the slippery slope theory and the notion that if the government can arm itself with nukes, citizens should be able to as well to maintain a level battlefield. In other words, I AM Mr. Thoughtful Moderate on this issue...thank you very much.
But let me get this straight...
1) You say that even though the founding fathers didn't anticipate computers, the constitution still protects our 1st amendment rights while typing on them.
2) Therefore the founding fathers who didn't anticipate semi-auto/automatic weapons would still support the 2nd amendment rights of those who wanted to own them.
3) But our 4th amendment rights to privacy regarding our papers don't count because emails are, as you put it, "personal communications" and different from personal effects?
I had you pegged as an originalist. I guess only when it's convenient.
Go sit in the corner with Cgrad and Grizza.
I never implied that emails were not protected by the Constitution. I said they were communications. Just as written letter are- and the government needs a warrant seize or read them. If you want to call them effects, then fine- knock yourself out. They are still protected all the same.
Sometimes I think you just post because you think you're somehow being left out. Or behind.
And I'm sure you're farts smell fine...to you.
