During a recent argument with an liberal anti about the 2nd amendment I pointed out that Ronald Reagan signed the Mulford Act to keep the Black Panthers from patrolling the streets of Oakland. I am a liberal and, of course, oppose pretty much any gun control. But, I was wondering how conservatives on this forum square Reagan's signature on this law with the general claim that he is a defender of 2nd amendmant rights.
To me, it always seemed like this type of situation was actually what the 2nd amendment was created for. Here was a group that felt oppressed by the govenment and felt necesary to arm themselves as a means of self-defense. What was the California government's response - outlaw carrying of arms in public. If that isn't big government I don't know what is.
To me, it always seemed like this type of situation was actually what the 2nd amendment was created for. Here was a group that felt oppressed by the govenment and felt necesary to arm themselves as a means of self-defense. What was the California government's response - outlaw carrying of arms in public. If that isn't big government I don't know what is.