Of Arms and the Law

Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home


Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography
The Lecture Notes of St. George Tucker
Original Popular Understanding of the 14th Amendment
Originalism and its Tools


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
Ammo.com, deals on ammunition
Scopesfield: rifle scope guide
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Clean Up ATF (heartburn for headquarters)
Concealed Carry Today
Knives Infinity, blades of all types
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
Leatherman Multi-tools And Knives
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
Gun Rights
Gun Trust Lawyer NFA blog
The Big Bore Chronicles
Good for the Country
Knife Rights.org
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Email Subscription
Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 6.8.8
Site Design by Sekimori

« Non-gun killer | Main | Condi Rice, Larry King, and the transcript »

Cornell Webpage on the Constitution

Posted by David Hardy · 22 May 2005 11:46 AM

The superb Cornell Univ. website (I subcribe to their email alert system, which emails you the syllabus of each Supreme Court ruling the day it comes out) has added a set of pages on the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

Checking out their Second Amendment page, I was pleased to find it as comprehensive as one might desire in such a page, and far more impartial than I had expected.

When matters are summed up with reasonable impartiality, though, a pattern emerges which seems unique to the Second Amendment. The vast bulk of serious legal scholarship goes one way, and the vast bulk of caselaw the other. I can't think of an area of law where you have this pattern, at least in a division this sharp and broad -- what does an amendment mean, rather than the fine details of its application to specific facts.

· contemporary issues

3 Comments | Leave a comment

Christopher A. George | May 22, 2005 4:25 PM | Reply

I checked out the website and it is indeed suprisingly evenhanded.
C.A.G.

Rudy DiGiacinto | May 23, 2005 10:49 PM | Reply

Why is legal scholarship at odds with the case law? John Adams had the right answer. "Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclination, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." - John Adams in Defence of the Defendants of the Boston Massacre.

It appears the judges prefer the “dictates of their passions” over the facts.

bud | May 25, 2005 1:55 PM | Reply

We all have filters between our Minds and Reality. Those filters are built from experience, and color our judgements.

Judges, unless they are members of the "gun culture" see only the negative side of gun usage, day after day. When they "ascend" to the appelate bench, that experience colors their judgement. When asked to determine if guns should be available, their instinct is going to tend "no", and this, probably unconscious, bias accounts for
the case law trend shown.

Judges, despite the system'S attempts to portray otherwise, put on their pants one leg at a time. "Decisions" are, far too often, simply verbal justification for gut feel.

It shows.

Leave a comment