Ravenwood - 06/30/05 06:00 AM
Walter Williams gets it. When talking about property rights and the great government land grab of 2005, Williams noted that the Fifth Amendment was not the only Amendment that applies.
I think the socialist attack on judicial nominees who'd use framer-intent in their interpretation of the Constitution might also explain their attack on our Second Amendment "right of the people to keep and bear Arms." Why? Because when they come to take our property, they don't want to risk buckshot in their butts.The Founding Fathers intended that the individual right to keep and bear arms not be infringed. If it weren't for heavily armed private citizens, we would not have defeated the British during the the American Revolution. And those citizens were usually packing superior firepower than either army.
Category: Cold Dead Hands
Comments (2) top link me
Shhhhh!
You're not supposed to understand that the rifled muskets of the citizenry were far more lethally accurate at much longer distances than the smoothbore muskets issued to the militaries of the day!
Strong suggestion:
Pick up a copy of Shooter by retired Marine Gunnery Sargeant Jack Coughlin.
Amazing what havoc can be created by sniper teams who "shoot-n-scoot," picking off high-value targets from long range & then moving quickly on.
Posted by: Kevin Baker at June 30, 2005 11:39 AMAlthough, if the Army with muskets-and also bayonets, and training in their use- manages to fight through the sniper fire and close with the troops who have only long rifles and no bayonets-or no training with them-can wreak some serious havoc.
Although there weren't snipers employed in the battle, the Battle of Camden, SC is a great example of what a bayonet charge can do.
Posted by: Heartless Libertarian at June 30, 2005 7:27 PM(c) Ravenwood and Associates, 1990 - 2014
