Gun control vexes still-young America

In the article "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness"

Certainly didn't stop the right from banning Gay marriage which violates all three.

1st Amendment right of speech is good to a point, but it also has restrictions under law that can lead to prison. So those that think because it is set in stone because some guys wrote it at a different time when there were only 9 states, when the military was the people basically and the land unsettled are wrong.

I will keep saying it "Why should a bunch of dead guys have more influence over government than the people that live today?" They shouldn't.

troy prouty*

Troy, it was only a few years ago that the State of Washington passed a law that prohibits people (Men in particular) that enjoy being sodomized by animals (Horses in particular) from the (for lack of a better term) 'fulfillment' of their "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."..or.. at least to die trying.

(No pun intended) ...wink..

Are you going to stand up for those peoples rights, because it is common knowledge that there are at least two things that a man cannot force a horse to do when a horse does not wish to do so.

One entails the act of leading a horse to water and forcing it to drink, and the other does not.

posted "sodomized by animals (Horses in particular)”

Well I don't know about the law. I only know of the incident that could have led to that law. Ranch for a ((Fee)) that eventually led to a death of a person.

Let's face it. It has always been a slick road when government enters the mix to do things that are for "your own protection" when maybe a person doesn't want them too. It took a lot more effort for seat belt laws, to require insurance on vehicles, wearing helmets when on motorcycles and now possibly banning assault rifles to keep the amount killed down in mass attempted shootings.

I don't like paying insurance (now even healthcare required) because that even brings a third entity (private company) into my life (and they have some measure of power over it (cost) and the government let's them) . With Assault weapons it just not allowing a weapon to be purchased, it might violate freedom of sorts, but it is a little different.
The biggest question and I think the Supreme missed this point on healthcare. Isn't about freedom per say more than it is about having a third party have a controlling interest in someone else and violate those three princples by applying terms. For example maybe I want go to 1 blazer game a year, but because I now am required to have insurance that has increased in price. I can't.

Rawls believed in balance and sometimes that meant the rich needed limitations in order to help those below because it was more sustainable for our economy. Sometimes people need limits (because the needs of many outweigh the few).

Troy, I believe it was either 2008 or sometime in 2009 that it had been discovered that there were actually tour groups traveling from as far away as San Francisco to that horse ranch.

Believe it ..or.. not, up until then the State of Washington hadn't felt there was enough of that particular type of commercial activity to neccessitate a law to define it as an illegal or immoral behaviour not to be condoned for profit.

Much to the chagrin of the sodomites down South, somebody up North finally came out and said it ....heY! ...there otta be a law aginst doin that kinda stuff!

Wow, now there is....

gives new meaning to mustang ranch.. wink..

troy*