Wirt writes:

> Much more recently, Justice Douglas, joined by Justice Marshall...
>
>I consider this text to be a quite reasonable and accurate interpretation of
>the intent and historical context of the adoption of the Second Amendment.

This is getting tiresome. Not the fact that it's off-topic, but the fact
that it's unproductive. Unless one is a Justice of the Supreme Court, the
historical context isn't relevant. The Bill of Rights was drafted over
200 years ago, in a society that was almost unimaginably different from
today's. Clearly, the Second Amendment is broken, or there wouldn't be an
argument. The real question is whether it gets fixed by removing the part
about the militia, or removing all the rest as well. But that would
require dealing with the problem ourselves, a much more daunting prospect
than delegating the task to people who've been pushing up daisies for
most of the last two centuries.

(Actually, I suppose delegating to the dead is accepted practice in some
large midwestern cities.)

-- Bruce

PS. One of the best popular books I've read on the Bill of Rights is
Alderman and Kennedy's _In Our Defense_
(<http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0380717204/opt>). They discuss
each  amendment using one or two key court cases that relied on it or
that established its commonly-accepted interpretation. It's a highly
readable and immediate discussion of a subject that can easily be dry and
distant. Warmly recommended.

- B


--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bruce Toback    Tel: (602) 996-8601| My candle burns at both ends;
OPT, Inc.            (800) 858-4507| It will not last the night;
11801 N. Tatum Blvd. Ste. 142      | But ah, my foes, and oh, my friends -
Phoenix AZ 85028                   | It gives a lovely light.
btoback AT optc.com                |     -- Edna St. Vincent Millay
Mail sent to [log in to unmask] will be inspected for a
fee of US$250. Mailing to said address constitutes agreement to
pay, including collection costs.