[Info-vax] Nice printers for OpenVMS?

[JF Mezei]

Jan-Erik Soderholm wrote:

> Now, wasn't that paper written over 200 years ago? It might have
> been the right thing then (probably was), but how can anyone
> think that it still is ?
> 
> It's like trying to use some book from (aprox) 2012 years
> ago and applying it on todays world. It will fail of course.

There are concepts which are timeless and are valid today. There are
concepts which have long ago been made redundant.

In the case of the USA constitution, the failure is in the choice of
words. If they meant that the citizens should have a means to overthrow
a government or at least stop a rogue govt, then they should have stated
it in such words instead of "right to bear arms".

A good legal document is one which cannot be misinterpreted and which
can stand the test of time.

It is obvious that the "right to bear arms" has failed those 2 tests,
and because it is being misused to support the firearm industries, their
lobby prevents the USA government from fixing the text of this amendment.

One need not have a constitutional right to justify the purchase and
keeping of a firearm.


But a constitutional right sure makes it hard for a government to
restrict distribution of firearms.