A piece at National Review by John Yoo, part of a series on restoring constitutional order, addresses the issue.
Everyone here knows my position, which I see no need to repeat after 15 years of blogging. If you don't know what I think about it, or just about anything else, it's in the archives. As a matter of fact, I could probably stop writing this blog just anytime, returning to it only when I change an older opinion for some reason. My opinion on the 2nd has not changed at all.
2 comments:
I don't usually find it necessary to burrow down into the Constitutional and and philosophical foundations, so it's nice to find well thought out defenses. Thank you.
Usually I have to go no further than looking at control advocates arguments and saying "but there's no evidence that what you propose will reduce violence; why should we inconvenience others at all for for no reason?" Or again "Nor do people 'need' skiing, Junior Year Abroad, imported vehicles, or other dangerous items. Who made you arbiter over those?" Or finally "What if gun owners are actually not easily-misled bigots? What if you don't actually know their motives telepathically?" Controllers make me lazy by advancing such poor arguments.
You're welcome.
Post a Comment