[PLUG-TALK] Fair Use, etc.

J.A. Henshaw jeff at jhenshaw.com
Thu Mar 28 01:00:44 UTC 2002


Russ Johnson wrote:

> I'm prefacing this with the following statement: I am NOT in any way,
> advocating either gun control or gun ownership. I don't own a gun, and I
> don't intend to, but you may. It's not my call.


Whose call is it, in your opinion?


> 
> On Wed, 2002-03-27 at 15:54, J.A. Henshaw wrote:
> 
>>"well regulated militia" 
>>
> 
> Let's dissect that term, shall we?
> 
> "well". Assuming the adverb. Means; justly, rightly, expertly,
> satisfactorily, and a couple of other adverbs.
> 
> "regulated". Inflected form of regulate. Regulate is "to govern or
> direct according to rule". 
> 
> "militia". The noun can mean a part of the organized armed forces, a
> body of citizens organized for military service or the whole body of
> able-bodied male citizens declared by law as being subject to call to
> military service.
> 
> So, the long version of "well regulated militia" could be, "expertly
> directed, according to rules, part of the organized armed forces of the
> United States".
> 
> Or, it could mean; "justly governed, able-bodied male citizens of the
> United States, declared by law as being subject to military service."
> 
> In every instance, militia deals with being part of the military, either
> that of the states, or the country as a whole.
> 
> 


This is a well hashed argument and I won't take the time to 
correct you.

I would however sugggest that you read the notes to the 
constitutional convention and then read what you wrote again.


>>and their use of the word "regulated" in 
>>that sentence were a problem for those who oppose private 
>>firearm ownership and state militias being composed of all 
>>able-bodeied males 18 and over,  rather than the corporate 
>>US National Guard.
>>
> 
> Corporate? How? It's run and paid for by the State government.
> 



Also a corporation.

Now what?


> 
>>So if they leave out the 200 year old definition and 
>>subsitute a NewSpeak version,  I think we can safely believe 
>>they must have had some purpose for doing so.
>>
> 
> What is the "200 year old definition"?
> 
> 
>>Who else is responsible for the perceived shift in the 
>>meanings of words?
>>
>>Mass Media?
>>
> 
> Yes. See "Hacker".


Now that you have taken the bait,  let's talk about who 
controls mass media, shall we?


> 
> 
>>Paranoid is when you see conspiracies against yourself 
>>personally,  which do not exist.
>>
> 
> No, paranoid is characterized by suspiciousness, persecutory trends, or
> megalomania. It has nothing to do with whether they exist or not. Only
> that you think they do. They may not... But then again, they may.
> 
> 

You make no sense to me.

Are you saying that anyone who reads the constitution is 
paranoid?






More information about the PLUG-talk mailing list