I know the Constitution better than you. Yes, I used short-hand that you clearly understood. Drop the "I'm offended that you think the government grants rights" act and respond to the subject at hand. The government saw the disarmament of civilians to prevent uprisings, and the massive difficulties of waging wars with unarmed peasants. The framers looked to solve both issues in one sentence, which is why it was written as it was.

That makes sense. I'd prefer to disband the standing army, but if you'd rather disarm the population, that's your opinion.

So you don't disagree with my statement, but the implications of it.

He can at least submit them, even if rejected. But he doesn't even try.

They are required to keep the lines up for 8 hours for 911 reasons. I don't think there are any actual penalties if they don't meet the minimum.

The issue is that the trees around power lines should be cut so that no tree under any winds, could contact the line (presuming the tree isn't uprooted by a tornado or such). In bad areas, the lines should be burried. There's no reason for a moder country to have power outages. It's a trivial cost to provide vital infrastructure. Maybe that's their point?

If you want to flee, a motorbike is the most important thing. Why? Because there's no traffic snarl you can't make it through. A Dual-purpose, and you should be able to cross almost all terrain as well. that, and on a full tank (easy to fill, just a few gallons) and will get you hundreds of miles.

There are gravity-fed magazines (mainly for air rifles), so that doesn't help.

A tumor is an unwanted growth of cells. (though I guess you could substitute "normal" for unwanted, and declare it normal, thus not a tumor)

"Lack of foresight? I'm 16, I tried to get on the pill, but I was required by law to have my parent's permission, and they wanted to enforce abstinence through fear of pregnancy. So I guess you are right, it is all about punishing the children."

You could have a mechanical trigger with an electrical trigger. The electronic signal would release the hammer. A firing pin would still be a spring-loaded mechanical hammer, and there's no reason it would need to be "cocked" electrically if the trigger is electric.

A well regulated militia was designed for a time when there was no standing army. That's another reason why there is so much confusion over the wording, we live in a very different time, and having a well armed civilian militia ready to be conscripted into a military force (using their own weapons) was a necessity for national defense, not just individual liberty. As I've pointed out many times before, if China were to start an invasion of the US tomorrow, they would be repelled by the civilians in L.A. There are more guns in private hands in the LA area than in the hands of the Chinese military.

That was the reason behind the 2nd Amendment, and why it was worded that way. "To defend our country in the absence of a standing army, we must allow the civilians to arm themselves to serve in the army when it is assembled". Yes, it was also discussed that the armed people could rise up, but it was never considered in a time when standing armies were the norm.

Interestingly enough, they (conservatives) count suicide by car as "speed related" and likely "alcohol related" so they can inflate the numbers of speed and alcohol related crashes.

Modern brakes are more reliable than old-car brakes, and have more electronics involved. There are numerous other similar situations, fly-by-wire and such that lean towards showing you to be wrong than supporting your position.

And a clip and a magazine are completely different, even if you'll find magazines labeled as "clips" in gun stores, and the meanings are identical (a means of holding multiple cartridges together for use in a semi-auto). So yes, they will use pointless distinctions (assault rifle, assault weapon) in an attempt to discredit anyone they see as not having the same opinion as themselves.

The result is that when you lose your arm through doctor's negligence, you must prove actual loss in court, or you get nothing for him having robbed you of your arm. The Conservatives are the first to champion punitive prison sentences, but a punitive civil judgment is insane. I don't get the logic. It seems inconsistent to me.