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 6.8.7
Site Design by Sekimori

« News from GA | Main | Another dumb criminal story »

Fred Thompson on DoJ brief

Posted by David Hardy · 16 January 2008 01:48 PM

Here's the story. Too busy writing to say more.

· Parker v. DC

1 Comment | Leave a comment

bud | January 18, 2008 9:46 AM | Reply

I loved this quote in the article:
"We must never let the elites claim that only they can tell us what the Constitution means. That is a usurpation of the power we took from the King, transferred to five lawyers.

The elites construct an edifice of words to make things complicated to give themselves power."

The man gets it... and is willing to say what every other power-hungry politician is loathe to admit, because they see themselves in that mirror.
I would hate to see an all no-lawyer S.C., but I think that, along with the "female" and "black" seats that custom and politics have given us, a "not-a-lawyer" seat. I think that the leavening would produce better constitutional decisions, although this person would probably be a drag on the "law" issues that regularly make there way there.

Leave a comment