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

« Six years ago | Main | Regret to report... »

Interesting

Posted by David Hardy · 22 May 2009 02:40 PM

In the left sidebar, I have had a link to the 2004 Department of Justice report on the Second Amendment, taking a individual rights view. Click on it since the change in administrations, and the link is broken.

Apparently, they archived certain papers of the last administration. I finally found it here.

Hat tip to reader Balsaman...

5 Comments | Leave a comment

periwinkle | May 22, 2009 3:20 PM | Reply

Just like Stalin, Obama and his crew will attempt to rewrite history and won't hesitate to airbrush people out of pictures to change the "reality" that they want seen.

These people are frightening not because they would disagree with me. They are frightening because of basic lack of character and because they believe that anything they may do is justifiable so long as it helps with what they have decided is "best for all of the little people," who surely "look like ants" from where they live.

Chuck | May 22, 2009 3:22 PM | Reply

Interesting. I have had the same problem with some Florida Attorney General Opinion Letters over the years. Some favorable opinions concerning concealed carry have disappeared.

Jim W | May 22, 2009 11:28 PM | Reply

It's quite likely that the opinions were overridden by changes to the concealed carry statutes.

I've met with McCollum a bunch of times when he wasn't in campaign mode and he has always seemed like a pretty staunch conservative. He's always been unswervingly pro-gun as far back as I can remember. I doubt he is trying to sabotage concealed carry in Florida.

DJMoore | May 23, 2009 10:14 AM | Reply

David, what was the original address for this document you listed?

I found Clayton Cramer's analysis of this opinion, which links to the opinion at
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm.
It's currently hosted at
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.pdf, essentially the same only with ".pdf" instead of ".htm". A quick sampling of opinions from the OLC's opinion table of contents suggests that the longer and more complicated opinions and memoranda, of which this is a prime example, have been converted to PDFs, possibly to preserve pagination and formatting. Certainly the PDFs are easier to read and look far better than the HTML documents, and would print out properly, with their many footnotes at the bottom of the correct pages.

I hate to say it, but I think this link rot is not due to Obama's manifest opacity and misdirection. It's just DOJ doing a better job organizing their archives. (I admit, though, it would have been simple for the archive webmasters to have redirected the original HTML link to the new PDF.)

zppypinhead | May 23, 2009 7:25 PM | Reply

To elaborate on DJMoore's post, above -

Shockingly, the URL change may not be due to any sinister plot. I think you'll see similar format conversions gradually occurring all over the Federal government. GPO and the Archivist of the United States have been struggling for a long time to come up with generally applicable guidelines for Federal on-line document publication, and I understand now encourage use of .pdf (as a cross-platform format that displays consistently and is usable by individuals needing assistive devices) for permanent documents.

I suspect whatever links there are to the specific document in the usdoj.gov website have also been updated to point to the .pdf version. The problem here may have simply been an outside link directly to a version of the doc that's now unsupported.

Leave a comment