From: b!X <bix@geekforce.org>
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1998 21:44:59 +0800
To: Reeza! <howree@cable.navy.mil>
Subject: Re: IP: Clinton Wants Loophole In U.S. Free Speech Closed
In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19981111182325.00879d50@205.83.192.13>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.93.981111052345.5702A-100000@millennium-cafe.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



On Wed, 11 Nov 1998, Reeza! wrote:

> Amendment I
> Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
> prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech,
> or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to
> petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
> 
> Amendment II
> A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,
> the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. 
> 
> --end pasted text--
> 
> While the 2nd does say "well regulated", it should also be pointed out that
> the 1st does not say "right OF THE PEOPLE", except in the freedom of
> assembly clause.

And notice also that the 1st begins with "Congress shall make no law" while
the 2nd begins with "a well regulated militia".

> >(And yes I know I'm asking for a shitstorm of trouble saying that on THIS
> >list of all places).
> 
> So why did you?

Becos the attempted paraody was lame in the same ways that all attempts to
nonrationally support 2nd amendment freedoms by calling down the gods of 1st
amendment freeomds always are nonrational. (And no, that's not me saying
supporting 2nd amendment freedoms is irrational; it's me saying using the
1st amendment to do so is irrational).


- b!X (Guerrilla Techno-fetishist @ GEEK Force)