A popular argument in favor of Second Amendment absolutism is that without it, you wouldn’t have any way to defend the other amendments. My riposte is that without the First Amendment, this country wouldn’t be worth defending.
Francis Volpe, "
2nd Amendment is not the one under fire", The Sentinel Newspaper, Carlisle, Pennsylvania, November 27, 2007
Francis Volpe's article is pretty much the standard boilerplate that one hears from those who seek to eliminate or severely restrict the private ownership and use of firearms, a knight -- comments that routinely go unexamined by those who make them because they are usually used only among like-minded people who relish those private or exclusive times when they can congregate and let their inner fascist run wild without fear of contradiction. Oh well, whatever floats their frog.:-)
There is one sentence though that he used that always brings a smile of resignation to me at the thought of the lack of thought that permeates much of our society. See if you can see the illogic -- even stupidity -- that is expressed in his use of this sentence:
On that score, D.C. citizens might have to go without handguns a while longer.
If nothing else, these people can be extremely entertaining, no?;-)
Yours,
Issodhos
