[499] in libertarians
[vimrich@MIT.EDU: ACLU and Guns]
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (damartin@ampere.mit.edu)
Sun Dec 11 23:34:43 1994
Date: Sun, 11 Dec 1994 23:33:33 -0500
From: damartin@ampere.mit.edu
To: libertarians@MIT.EDU
>Actually there is a principled way to set such limits, set in the
>Miller case (1939?). "[any weapon] that can be considered part of
>the normal militia use" (from memory so I may have miffed that a bit).
The way I usually look at it is that some weapons are useful
for overthrowing one's own government, and others are useful for
attacking other countries. Some are useful for both. Weapons which are
useful only for attacking other nations, like atmoic weapons, wouldn't
be useful in overthrowing a tyrannical state, and thus I would support
restrictions on them.
Interestingly enough, a machine gun would probably be more
useful in overthrowing the government than a handgun, so in one sense,
you would want to restrict handguns more than machine guns. (I would
just restrict niether of them.)
As far as the ACLU goes, how many members does it have, and
who actually determies its policies? If everyone in the Libertarian
Party joined the ACLU and then voted in officers who supported a much
more libertarian platform....
-David Martin
