Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site alberta.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!microsoft!fluke!ssc-vax!uw-beaver!ubc-visi!alberta!stephen
From: stephen@alberta
Newsgroups: net.flame
Subject: Re: weapons and nukes.
Message-ID: <522@alberta.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 21-Oct-83 02:37:13 EDT
Article-I.D.: alberta.522
Posted: Fri Oct 21 02:37:13 1983
Date-Received: Thu, 20-Oct-83 05:29:35 EDT
References: <189@tekecs.UUCP> <370@ihuxb.UUCP> <517@alberta.UUCP> <389@ihuxb.UUCP>
Organization: U. of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada
Lines: 16

------------
    The precedent is that such weapons (bazookas, howitzers,
    16-inch guns,etc.) are already outlawed for the civilian
    population.  .... What does it matter what type of weapon it is?
    The point is that legislators and bureaucrats have decided and
    will continue to decide where the line will be drawn.
------------

That is exactly the point I am trying to make! How much more
unconstitutional is it to limit the use of large arms (PTN's being
a worst case) than the use of small arms?   If legislators and
bureaucrats can "decide where the line will be drawn" then why
can't they draw it at concealable weapons?

    Stephen Samuel
     (alberta!stephen)