My Favorite Part About This is the "Tradition" Argument

The 9th Circuit says there's no Constitutional right to carry a concealed weapon.

OK. Open carry is fine with me.

But my favorite part is the argument:
“The historical materials bearing on the adoption of the Second and Fourteenth Amendments are remarkably consistent,” wrote Judge William Fletcher, going back to 16th century English law to find instances of restrictions on concealed weapons.
Mrs. Clinton made this argument during her recent failure to identify a right to keep and bear arms in the Constitution. She also spoke of "our history from the very beginning of the republic" in terms of identifying restrictions on the carrying of firearms. Nathan Deal said something similar in his veto of campus carry this year.

OK. We had a tradition about what constituted "marriage" too. It lasted from about a thousand years ago until last summer. You remember what you had to say about "tradition" as an argument then?

Not that I'm unwilling to accept such arguments now. I just would like an agreement that we'll accept them across the board.


Consul-At-Arms said...

Author Tom Kratman recently addressed the "back to 16th century English law to find instances of restrictions on concealed weapons" issue:

Hmmmm...unless there's a reason to think that the right we derived from English law and the unwritten constitution also included a "shall not be infringed" proviso - which I would think you've just denied (and I agree; i think among other restrictions those damned fish-eating Papists were denied arms) - then the fact that we added "shall not be infringed" suggests that we didn't import it in the English sense, but added our own expansion. Thus, no, the English restrictions, nor any restrictions, are not part of our law. Said differently, the right derives from the rights of Englismen but the restrictions do not follow.

Grim said...

Kratman has an excellent point. Certainly I'm inclined to refer to the English history of our rights and laws -- more than Englishmen are, these days -- but the Founding was a major event and in some ways represents a real break with the tradition.

One might say that before the Declaration of Independence, rights were purely traditional: you had the rights you had because your ancestors happened to wrest them from the king. After the Declaration, rights were grounded not in tradition but in a deduction of divine intent.

Ymar Sakar said...

Tom Kratman has a professional, although not ideological/political, relationship with the independent publisher VoxDay.

I thought I would mention that out there in case people didn't know that.

The "Alternative Right" is a very loose alliance at times.

I read some of Kratman's articles about military training experience/philosophy at Baen. They were rather top notch, from what I could see. Although many of the concepts I had already absorbed from other sources. It doesn't hurt to see another human application of the same ideal.

Like many military stories, there is something humorous to be found there. A humor that only exists when human stupidity and death on the field combines.

Btw, if people start emulating England too much, they'll end up with another Charles and Cromwell. Although it's probably too late for the US, as this nation is already emulating Caesar/army/people vs Senate problem.

After the Declaration, rights were grounded not in tradition but in a deduction of divine intent.

Biblically, there are only two examples of New Jerusalem or Zion. The US and the current modern day Israel, that has gathered back the scattered tribes. Technically, no other country than the US, has gathered back more disparate tribes in one place. China town and Mexico land after all.

That's not necessarily a good thing, based on the prophecies.

Ymar Sakar said...

John C Wright was another writer I found interesting, but seemed to be an asset that could not be connected to the greater war.

That was how it looked like in 2007, 2009, 2010, 2012. All these various assets required to destroy the Left's power, but none of them knew each other, and all of them seemed to be either apolitical or merely ignoring the issues at large.

It was only when they started combining together, that I noticed there was something going on online which was both expected yet unexpected.

Eric Blair said...

Good catch Grim. I have to remember that one.