On 12/23/2012 2:41 PM, Scout wrote:
>
> "Carol Kinsey Goman" <ckg@förbes.com> wrote in message
> news:1OudnQPr5c0x2krNnZ2dnUVZ5uqdnZ2d@giganews.com...
>> On 12/23/2012 9:10 AM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>> Carol Kinsey Goman <ckg@förbes.com> wrote in talk.politics.guns :
>>>
>>>> On 12/22/2012 10:46 PM, Scout wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> "Carol Kinsey Goman" <ckg@förbes.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:JcOdnTEGD4PkxkvNnZ2dnUVZ5gednZ2d@giganews.com...
>>>>>> On 12/22/2012 2:10 PM, Scout wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Carol Kinsey Goman" <ckg@förbes.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:gbidnVuwYfIfsEvNnZ2dnUVZ5vednZ2d@giganews.com...
>>>>>>>> On 12/22/2012 1:56 PM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Carol Kinsey Goman <ckg@förbes.com> wrote in talk.politics.guns :
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Some limitation on the types of arms protected by the second
>>>>>>>>>> amendment is clearly within the
>>>>>>>>>> scope of the amendment.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Another gun grabber straw man.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Not a straw man at all. And I'm not a "gun grabber" - I own
>>>>>>>> guns, and
>>>>>>>> would like to own some more, although I can't see dumping a
>>>>>>>> whole lot
>>>>>>>> of money into it.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> No right is "unlimited."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Many of your fellow crazed proto-Nazi gun nuts wish to believe that
>>>>>>>> the gun rights secured by the second amendment *are* unlimited.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sorry, but I believe people were contesting your assertion that such
>>>>>>> limitations existed within the 2nd.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Of *course* they exist "within" the second, you idiot. They
>>>>>> *have* to
>>>>>> exist "within" it, else how else could the court see them?
>>>>>
>>>>> Exactly. So please present the text from the 2nd Amendment in which
>>>>> the
>>>>> court saw such limitations.
>>>>
>>>> I guess you're not familiar with the text of the amendment:
>>>>
>>>> A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a
>>>> free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall
>>>> not be infringed.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I mean, you claim it's there, and you assert to be such an expert
>>>>> about,
>>>>> so where's the text in the 2nd that imposes that limit?
>>>>
>>>> No, I'm citing the court opinion, written by an expert.
>>>>
>>>> Anyway, you're back to arguing that it's an unlimited right. Why can't
>>>> you make up your minds?
>>>
>>> How tall is your straw man
>>
>> I haven't committed any straw man fallacy. Scooter *is* back to
>> arguing that the right protected by the amendment is unlimited. You
>> know he is, too.
>
> Well, if I'm always saying it,

You are always saying it. You're too stupid to realize you are, but you are. 
When you say you have a right to just whatever guns you want, you are saying the
right to arms is unlimited.  You're wrong, of course.