Difference between revisions of "Talk:504: Legal Hacks"

Explain xkcd: It's 'cause you're dumb.
Jump to: navigation, search
(Created page with "While RSA is mentioned as a cryptographic mechanism whose "munitions" status was fought over, yours truly considers the whole of PGP's fight (and its original ''1st'' Amendmen...")
 
Line 2: Line 2:
  
 
So, anyway, that's something using the 1st Amendment, something using the 2nd Amendment...  So how can we theoretically fight the issue via the right not to have soldiers quartered in one's home? ;)  [[Special:Contributions/178.107.63.150|178.107.63.150]] 23:39, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
 
So, anyway, that's something using the 1st Amendment, something using the 2nd Amendment...  So how can we theoretically fight the issue via the right not to have soldiers quartered in one's home? ;)  [[Special:Contributions/178.107.63.150|178.107.63.150]] 23:39, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
 +
 +
Every time I see the 2nd Amendment in text... that one comma. That first comma doesn't belong. I think they were trying to write, "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, ''will always have the right to bear arms''" but then they got distracted or changed their mind and just forgot that the comma was there. I'm not usually that much of a grammar nazi, but that's the freaking ''Constitution!''  --[[Special:Contributions/69.211.56.17|69.211.56.17]] 22:41, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Revision as of 22:41, 10 October 2013

While RSA is mentioned as a cryptographic mechanism whose "munitions" status was fought over, yours truly considers the whole of PGP's fight (and its original 1st Amendment idea to get around the restrictions) as the archetype of this kind of export battle. Never did get me one of the alleged T-shirts with the souce-code printed on, that were supposed to be going around in 1991-ish, though...

So, anyway, that's something using the 1st Amendment, something using the 2nd Amendment... So how can we theoretically fight the issue via the right not to have soldiers quartered in one's home? ;) 178.107.63.150 23:39, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Every time I see the 2nd Amendment in text... that one comma. That first comma doesn't belong. I think they were trying to write, "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, will always have the right to bear arms" but then they got distracted or changed their mind and just forgot that the comma was there. I'm not usually that much of a grammar nazi, but that's the freaking Constitution! --69.211.56.17 22:41, 10 October 2013 (UTC)