tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post2669403364266070285..comments2024-03-06T06:34:42.881-05:00Comments on EconoSpeak: Guns and CommasUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post-44188875400049164662020-01-22T20:21:56.173-05:002020-01-22T20:21:56.173-05:00Thanks for those. Another interesting angle:
htt...Thanks for those. Another interesting angle: <br /><br />https://www.salon.com/2013/01/14/the_nra_once_supported_gun_control/<br /><br />Seems perhaps southern delegates took (or came up in parallel with) an idea proposed by skeptical Pennsylvanians and shaped it to preserve state militias as instrument of order/oppression?Arthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15018064923442294945noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post-47195357600691076992020-01-22T20:07:50.040-05:002020-01-22T20:07:50.040-05:00First I've heard of that but possible. My unde...First I've heard of that but possible. My understanding, from debate materials 9n the constitution, was that a group from rural Pennsylvania with anti-federalist tendencies submitted a demand for enumerated right that included he personal right to bear arms. Arthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15018064923442294945noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post-55375846696477313562020-01-22T15:42:38.951-05:002020-01-22T15:42:38.951-05:00Here's a couple links on the 2nd amendment and...Here's a couple links on the 2nd amendment and slave-hunting militias.<br /><br />https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/09/the-origins-of-public-carry-jurisprudence-in-the-slave-south/407809/<br /><br />https://www.rawstory.com/2018/02/second-amendment-ratified-preserve-slavery/JDMnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post-64012569057384922122020-01-22T14:06:58.436-05:002020-01-22T14:06:58.436-05:00It was also the case that, following independence,...It was also the case that, following independence, the federal government had almost no army (it did have a fairy substantial navy, for dealing with smuggling, for example).<br />(https://www.britannica.com/topic/The-United-States-Army)<br />"When Washington was inaugurated as president in 1789, the number of men in service was 595"<br />"One of the first tasks Washington assigned to the secretary of war, Maj. Gen. Henry Knox, was to prepare legislation for a military policy as outlined in his Sentiments. The principal element of this proposed legislation—establishment of a centrally coordinated militia system—was rejected by Congress in the Militia Act of 1792. This decision by the lawmakers was partly because of fear that Knox’s proposal would concentrate too much power in the hands of the federal government"<br />"Until 1812 the army passed through swift periods of expansion and reduction, depending upon the immediacy of the Indian and foreign threats. From a single regiment in 1789, it changed to 3 in 1791, 5 in 1792 (in the wake of Saint Clair’s Defeat), 9 in 1798 (during the XYZ Affair and quasi-war with France), 6 in 1800, 3 in 1802, and 11 in 1808."<br />In 1846, the standing army had 8,600 men.<br />In 1914, about 25,000.<br />In 1939, 190,000.<br />https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_United_States_Army#Personnel<br /><br />So at the very least, prior to the Civil War, the existence of *state* militias was probably somewhat important. As the size of the US military establishment grew, the importance of state militias has inevitably declined. And now, it's fairly clear that "A well regulated Militia," far from "being necessary to the security of a free State," has become an anachronism. And, thus, as it seems to me, regulation of the type of weapons that people might reasonably be allowed to possess is a legitimate government function. And that function can best be served by uniform national regulations (see, for example, the ease with which people in Chicago can acquire weapons simply by driving to northwest Indiana).Don Coffinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07198988872512792834noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post-24534241320805929842020-01-22T13:37:33.589-05:002020-01-22T13:37:33.589-05:00Can you provide some more identifying information ...Can you provide some more identifying information about the Richmond debate and Patrick Henry? I've been looking for something like for the last few years, having read hints about the link between the 2nd amendment and slave patrols (which I have heard could impress any adult white male) and have come up pretty much empty (more a tribute to my googling skills than anything else). A book, a link, information that would let me focus my search better.<br /><br />Thank youmarcel proustnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post-73176158061184183022020-01-22T08:51:33.452-05:002020-01-22T08:51:33.452-05:00A judge should be wise enough to look to the possi...A judge should be wise enough to look to the possible consequences of his or her decisions. A judge should be wise enough to change his or her mind when the evidence merits. A judge should generally accord these qualities to the decisions of his or her predecessors; looking to their decisions as law. Given that judges pass judgment on others, a judge should be law abiding, of good moral character, ... above reproach. <br /><br />At the present time we have three, maybe four or five, supreme court justices: Alito, Thomas, Gorsuch, and perhaps Kavanaugh and Roberts, who feel that they, more than anyone before them or now on the court, know how the constitution should be interpreted; would impose their interpretation on the nation no matter the consequences. Some consequences of this sort of thinking of late include: District of Columbia v. Heller. McDonald v. City of Chicago, Shelby County v. Holder, Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, and, most recently, Rucho v. Common Cause; all decisions with horrendous consequences.ken melvinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post-67142857973216907022020-01-22T08:51:02.255-05:002020-01-22T08:51:02.255-05:00It takes so long, 50, 100, ..., years for the cour...It takes so long, 50, 100, ..., years for the court to correct it mistakes.ken melvinnoreply@blogger.com