Of Arms and the Law
Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home
Get an autographed copy of our Heller brief! $7.99 incl. S&H
Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography

ISOcover150x200sm.jpg

I've released my documentary film on the history of the right to arms, "In Search of the Second Amendment." It stars twelve professors of constitutional law, plus Steve Halbrook, David Kopel, Don Kates, and Clayton Cramer. You can order the DVD here. And here's the Wikipedia page on it. SUPREME COURT SPECIAL: additional orders only $10 each.


2nd Amendment Discussions
1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
The BitchGirls
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Visitors since April 1, 2005: Free Web Counter
Free Hit Counter

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 3.15
Site Design by Sekimori

« AP on Parker -- gets almost everything wrong | Main | Government files amicus -- on DC's side! »

Amici for DC online

Posted by David Hardy · 11 January 2008 08:16 PM

Right here.

· Parker v. DC

Comments

This can't be Kosher.

"The States continued to regulate after the Second Amendment’s adoption. In the early 1800s, Kentucky and Louisiana banned the carrying of concealed weapons.

Everybody who knows the history of concealed weapons laws knows the Kentucky court found those laws unconstitutional. A significant fact left out in the statement and premise. I thought Rabbi's and Pastor's and Priests weren't supposed to lie? It's amazing who is willing to sell their souls these days

Posted by: Rudy DiGiacinto at January 11, 2008 08:53 PM

aMERICANS WERE HARDLY SHY ABOUT IDENTIFYING AND DISCUSSING SUCH FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AS REPRESENTATION, TRIAL BY JURY, OR FREEDOM OF CONSCIENCE, OR THE NATURAL RIGHTS TO LIFE, LIBERTY, AND PROPERTY. tHE FACT THAT REFERENCES TO THE KEEPING OF FIREARMS ARE SO FEW AND TERSE, OR THAT THE MODERN ACADEMIC CONTROVERSY OVER THE sECOND aMENDMENT HAS BEEN FORCED TO SQUEEZE SO MUCH MODERN INTERPRETIVE BLOOD FROM SO FEW EVIDENTIARY TURNIPS, IS ITSELF AN INDICATOR OF HOW MINOR A QUESTION THIS WAS AT THE TIME.

Perhaps the simpler and more accurate conclusion would be that gun ownership wasn't debated because it fit under property ownership and it wasn't conceived to be something the govt could take away.

Posted by: dwlawson at January 11, 2008 09:41 PM

Post a comment




Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)