The Firing Line Forums - View Single Post - The Second Amendment protects nuclear weapons!

Christopher II · May 20, 2001, 06:43 PM

Bartholomew -

Take a look at my last post. I very specifically state that I do not, repeat NOT use these arguments in non-pro-gun forums.

Hmmm. Perhaps I should try to clarify my own position. I do, honestly and truly, think that private citizens should be able to purchase and own nuclear devices. My belief in property rights is very much absolute. However, I don't go around calling for the legalization of nuclear devices, because there are more important things to spend my time on. Heck, I'd be thrilled if the '94 AW ban was repealed, and a repeal of the NFA would be a dream come true. My living to see either of those happenings is unlikely enough, and I realize full well that the legalization of WMDs will probably never happen.

But that doesn't prevent me from arguing the case in theory.

(As an aside, can anyone quote to me the law that forbids the sale of nuclear devices to civilians? Just curious.)

Bartholomew, you talk about the Constitution (I'm assuming that you mean the Second Amendment.) Haven't we been saying all along here that the RKBA is not dependent on the Bill of Rights? That the Second Amendment only confirms a pre-existing right that every human being can lay claim to? That even if the Constitution had never existed, we would still have the right to keep and bear the arms of our choosing?

I just looked through the text of the Constitution, and it contained not one word or phrase that would give the federal government the power to restrict the ownership of property, save gold, silver, and intellectual property. Isn't it the case that the Constitution is an exhaustive list of the powers of the government? That the government can do what is spelled out in the Constitution, and nothing else???

That's my argument. Where have I gone wrong?

Oh, before I sign off, I should mention John McPhee's book The Curve of Binding Energy again. I fear that I gave a mistaken impression when I said the this book described how to build a nuclear weapon for under $2000. That's not quite correct. The Curve of Binding Energy is, in part, a series of interviews with a former Los Alamos scientist who worked for years in the United States nuclear weapons program. The book, among other things, describes how it would be possible to build a small, simple nuclear bomb (for cheap!) It is not, however, an instruction manual. For those who are interested in the science, engineering, and politics behind nuclear technology, I really cannot recommend this book highly enough. You can read more about this book here: http://www.johnmcphee.com/curve.htm

Enough for now.

Later,
Chris

May 20, 2001, 06:43 PM	#24
Christopher II Senior Member Join Date: November 22, 1999 Location: Germantown, MD Posts: 2,349	Bartholomew - Take a look at my last post. I very specifically state that I do not, repeat NOT use these arguments in non-pro-gun forums. Hmmm. Perhaps I should try to clarify my own position. I do, honestly and truly, think that private citizens should be able to purchase and own nuclear devices. My belief in property rights is very much absolute. However, I don't go around calling for the legalization of nuclear devices, because there are more important things to spend my time on. Heck, I'd be thrilled if the '94 AW ban was repealed, and a repeal of the NFA would be a dream come true. My living to see either of those happenings is unlikely enough, and I realize full well that the legalization of WMDs will probably never happen. But that doesn't prevent me from arguing the case in theory. (As an aside, can anyone quote to me the law that forbids the sale of nuclear devices to civilians? Just curious.) Bartholomew, you talk about the Constitution (I'm assuming that you mean the Second Amendment.) Haven't we been saying all along here that the RKBA is not dependent on the Bill of Rights? That the Second Amendment only confirms a pre-existing right that every human being can lay claim to? That even if the Constitution had never existed, we would still have the right to keep and bear the arms of our choosing? I just looked through the text of the Constitution, and it contained not one word or phrase that would give the federal government the power to restrict the ownership of property, save gold, silver, and intellectual property. Isn't it the case that the Constitution is an exhaustive list of the powers of the government? That the government can do what is spelled out in the Constitution, and nothing else??? That's my argument. Where have I gone wrong? Oh, before I sign off, I should mention John McPhee's book The Curve of Binding Energy again. I fear that I gave a mistaken impression when I said the this book described how to build a nuclear weapon for under $2000. That's not quite correct. The Curve of Binding Energy is, in part, a series of interviews with a former Los Alamos scientist who worked for years in the United States nuclear weapons program. The book, among other things, describes how it would be possible to build a small, simple nuclear bomb (for cheap!) It is not, however, an instruction manual. For those who are interested in the science, engineering, and politics behind nuclear technology, I really cannot recommend this book highly enough. You can read more about this book here: http://www.johnmcphee.com/curve.htm Enough for now. Later, Chris