Another guy stick it to Piers Morgan on the Gun issue

[res]

Originally Posted by Cuauhtémoc1520

Sounds very clear to me and I remembered it a little off but you get my point.

There is nothing in that quote about a man not accepting a Constitution older than himself . Infact Jefferson seems to be suggesting the complete opposite when he says " I am certainly not an advocate for frequent and untried changes in laws and constitutions. I think moderate imperfections had better be borne with; because, when once known, we accommodate ourselves to them, and find practical means of correcting their ill effects."


Jefferson is talking about the need for changes over epochs and is clearly taking a stance against "frequent and untried changes" in that quote. For a " civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors" as he writes, is for society to remain unchanged for epochs, not within a single lifetime. Who refers to their parents or grandparents as their "barbarous ancestors"? lol

Finally the Founders did provide a means by which the Constitution can be changed, it is the Amendment process.

[Cuauhtémoc1520]

Originally Posted by res

I found the original quote. It's a lot more Conservative than the statement referred to above. He is talking about changes over epochs.

"I am certainly not an advocate for frequent and untried changes in laws and constitutions. I think moderate imperfections had better be borne with; because, when once known, we accommodate ourselves to them, and find practical means of correcting their ill effects. But I know also, that laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths disclosed, and manners and opinions change with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also, and keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy, as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors."

All people are asking is that old verbiage be looked at when it's not clear anymore. We understand the reason individuals had the right to bear arms, because in those times states basically had standing militias and defended themselves.

Again, nobody wants to take away the guns. People just want a clear definition of what "right to bear arms" exactly means.

[Body Movin']

they're all law-abiding citizens... til the meds wear off.

[devildg]

Piers = spineless, pencil necked Briton who uses tragic incidents to justify controlling other people's lives who dont agree with his world view.

as they say in England....piss off youuuuu muck !!!!

[2shameless]

Not a huge fan of Gingrich and Morgan did his usual talking over his answers and quickly changing the subject every time he lost a point, but Newt more than held his own here.