gbaji wrote:
That's great that you've stumbled upon this worthless semantic position, but let's be practical.
Maybe if you believe that hard enough it'll become true.
gbaji wrote:
Do you think the fourth amendment is real?
Are you giving up on the second amendment and now hoping that the
fourth amendment will be of use to you? Is that what you're doing? I mean, it is and the question is completely rhetorical, but don't let it be said I didn't at least pretend to give you a chance to clarify. Try the tenth amendment next, that one actually had a degree of success.
Anyway, it's hard to pretend how much privacy you have when it only really takes is a "reasonable" excuse to remove it. Or, you know, a cop can stop and frisk you with only probable cause (
IE: their own discretion) and don't need a warrant for that. Not only that, but grand juries can use illegally obtained evidence. Even beyond that, there are cases where evidence previously thrown out because they were "illegally obtained" are later brought back in when proven that it would have been found eventually based on information independent of the illegal search
or if the prosecution can prove the evidence would have been found and seized by legal means not based on evidence or information illegally seized. Did you know that if a cop pulls you over and asks if he can search your car you're entitled to tell him no? What you might not know is you can't leave until he gives you the okay, and he in turn can call in a K9 unit to sniff your vehicle, and if the dog reacts then he doesn't need your permission anymore.
Besides all that, though. Totally can't get up in yo' business.
The rest of your post was just you asking the same questions over again. If you want the answers just go back a page or two. I like post counting as much as the next person but even I get tired of repetition.
gbaji wrote:
The founders clearly intended for guns to be not just as protected, but more protected than other things, perhaps precisely because they are deadly.
They also
intended them in the context of a
well regulated militia, and
nothing about it being done in secret is mentioned in there, but those little details
hurt your argument so it is completely understandable why you continue to ignore those facts.
Edited, Feb 26th 2013 11:08pm by lolgaxe