@MSGID:
<149c1cf9-d97e-412b-9947-648c8dfd429fn@googlegroups.com> 937e629b
@REPLY: 1@reader2.panix.com> e043bbad
@REPLYADDR edstas...@gmail.com
<edstasiak1067@gmail.com>
@REPLYTO 2:5075/128 edstas...@gmail.com
@CHRS: CP866 2
@RFC: 1 0
@RFC-References: 1@reader2.panix.com>
<878p2ip2o5tck5sfc7dumcm480doqhb2vo@4ax.com> 1@reader2.panix.com>
@RFC-Message-ID:
<149c1cf9-d97e-412b-9947-648c8dfd429fn@googlegroups.com>
@TZUTC: -0700
@PID: G2/1.0
@TID: FIDOGATE-5.12-ge4e8b94
> Louis Epstein
> > pyotr filipivich
> > 
> > Considering that the founders already considered having citizens 
> > own "military grade" firearm, cannons, and private warships to be 
> > perfectly acceptable, why not?
>
> Because "military grade" would be suddenly redefined and 
> they`d see the consequences in person. 

All the more reason to insure that the government doesn`t have
a monopoly on weapons.
--- G2/1.0
 * Origin: usenet.network (2:5075/128)
SEEN-BY: 50/109 301/1 463/68 467/888 4500/1
5001/100 5005/49 5020/715 830 848
SEEN-BY: 5020/1042 4441 12000 5030/49 1081 5054/8
5064/56 5075/35 128 5083/1
SEEN-BY: 5083/444
@PATH: 5075/128 5020/1042 4441