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

« Subsequent history | Main | Reminds me of my government days »

Yet another trip in the time machine

Posted by David Hardy · 27 January 2010 02:02 PM

Here's an OCR'd version (there may be typos) of my 1974 Chicago-Kent Law Review article on the Second Amendment. So far as I can see, it's the only online text of David T. Hardy, Of Arms and the Law, 51 Chi.-Kent L. Rev. 62 (1974). By modern standards, it's quite limited. But it was a start.

How it got started is rather funny, viewed from the standpoint of 2010. I wrote the article, over a period of months, on the subject of how gun control did not work -- this became the second half of the article. My editor, Mark Collins, pointed out that this is a LAW review, and I really ought to have a section on legal issues ... how about the Second Amendment? I responded that there's nothing there -- it's something that relates to national guard units and State government. In 1974 that was the "received wisdom" of the day. He said I ought to look into it, anyway. I did and started finding some incredible stuff. Much followed from that.

· Academic treatment

7 Comments | Leave a comment

Turk Turon | January 28, 2010 9:10 PM | Reply

Thanks! It's a good read.

Favorite thought so far, from p70:

"It is much more difficult to conceptualize a collective right to keep firearms, residing at once in the entire people and yet in no individual."

Nicely put!

DJMooret | January 28, 2010 9:42 PM | Reply

I'm not able to download the paper; I see the abstract page, I click on the One-Click Download link, some intermediate screen pops up for a split second, then returns to the abstract page.

I've tried to click on the download link several times in succession to read the intermediate screen, but got scolded by a "Data Integrity System Notice" for showing "an unusual download pattern".

Same problem in IE 8 and Firefox 3.5.7 under Windows 7.

DJMoore | January 28, 2010 10:10 PM | Reply

Ah, never mind. I created an account at ssrn and had the paper emailed to me.

Turk Turon | January 29, 2010 6:27 AM | Reply

In note 86: "...all power grows out of the barrel of a gum, "

I haven't found too many typos - that's pretty good OCR!

Stephen | January 29, 2010 8:25 AM | Reply

Nice!

Interesting ... I was an elementary school kid at this time, but my brother was attending the University of Arizona and had become a believer in the National Guard view of the 2nd amendment (UA seemed pretty liberal then).

I remember he and my dad, a WWII vet, having a heated debate about the 2nd amendment, with my Dad saying it was obviously a right of All American's and my brother saying even though it says "the right of the people" it still just refers to the army.

It sounded absurd to me then.

But in any case ... the lawyers may have accepted the militia rights view in '74, but I don't know that the general populace had. As a kid in school the few times the 2nd amendment was mentioned I got opposing views from different teachers, with the differentiating factor seeming to be age. All the people from my Dad's WWII generation knew what it meant, the "hippie" next generation did not.

KCSteve | January 29, 2010 9:42 AM | Reply
Much followed from that.

I'm going to have to nominate that for the Understatement Of The Day.

Old Easterner | January 29, 2010 3:30 PM | Reply

Oh my, it was early...

With the same mistake as Stevens' dissent in Heller:

Miller "upheld a conviction under the 1934 act..." p.65

Leave a comment