TexasCHLforum.com

A serious article published in the Columbia Law Review by a professor of law proposes treating firearms the same as pornography:

This Article offers a provocative proposal for tackling the issue of Second Amendment scope, one tucked in many dresser drawers across the nation: Treat the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms for self-defense the same as the right to own and view adult obscenity under the First Amendment — a robust right in the home, subject to near-plenary restriction by elected government everywhere else.

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm? ... id=1364759" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



Thanks to Tom Gresham for bringing this tidbit to my attention.

- Jim

seamusTX wrote:A serious article published in the Columbia Law Review by a professor of law proposes treating firearms the same as pornography:

This Article offers a provocative proposal for tackling the issue of Second Amendment scope, one tucked in many dresser drawers across the nation: Treat the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms for self-defense the same as the right to own and view adult obscenity under the First Amendment — a robust right in the home, subject to near-plenary restriction by elected government everywhere else.

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm? ... id=1364759" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



Thanks to Tom Gresham for bringing this tidbit to my attention.

- Jim

A few holes I see in their logic, that they might not like pointing out.

- You can buy pornography at plenty of stores without any sort of background check or waiting period whatsoever. Just proof that you're over 18.
- You can carry concealed pornography on your person without a license or background check of any kind. There is no restriction on where you can carry it, so long as you do not openly display it.
- The above even applies on an airplane, and in the secured area of an airport

In those regards, I'm all for treating guns like pornography!

dicion wrote:

seamusTX wrote:A serious article published in the Columbia Law Review by a professor of law proposes treating firearms the same as pornography:

This Article offers a provocative proposal for tackling the issue of Second Amendment scope, one tucked in many dresser drawers across the nation: Treat the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms for self-defense the same as the right to own and view adult obscenity under the First Amendment — a robust right in the home, subject to near-plenary restriction by elected government everywhere else.

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm? ... id=1364759" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



Thanks to Tom Gresham for bringing this tidbit to my attention.

- Jim

A few holes I see in their logic, that they might not like pointing out.

- You can buy pornography at plenty of stores without any sort of background check or waiting period whatsoever. Just proof that you're over 18.
- You can carry concealed pornography on your person without a license or background check of any kind. There is no restriction on where you can carry it, so long as you do not openly display it.
- The above even applies on an airplane, and in the secured area of an airport

In those regards, I'm all for treating guns like pornography!

Heh heh. I like the cut of your jib.

dicion wrote:- You can buy pornography at plenty of stores without any sort of background check or waiting period whatsoever. Just proof that you're over 18.

You can also buy pornography on the internets and download it or have it mailed to you via U.S.P.S. (or so I've heard ).

The fallacy in this article, which is wider and deeper than the Grand Canyon, is that "gun control" of any type has any effect on the actions of criminals.

If one wants to reduce crime at the cost of shredding the Bill of Rights, the most effective way to do it is to scrap the 4th amendment and allow police to stop and search anyone they want to. Experienced police officers have good instincts about who the do-bads are (often guys they have arrested previously). The New York City Police Department is pushing the edge of the envelope on this issue, and they have reduced violent crime by something like 50 or 60% since the 1990s.

Remember, if it saves one life, it's worth it.

- Jim

I reckon that the definition of pornography and the 2nd Amendment, like beauty, lies in the eyes of the beholder?

The Oldgringo asked that.

I think there's a great analogy between firearms and pornography: some people's irrational, visceral reactions to whichever offends them. Not to mention, a fair amount of hypocrisy.

Remember, if it saves one life, it's worth it.

Tens of thousands of U.S. military personnel have died defending the rights of Americans, including the Fourth Amendment. And you say a willful violation of the Fourth by police is suddenly acceptable if it saves a life?

That reads like the cops know best, they will take care of you, you don't need to defend yourself anymore.

“A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity”. Sigmund Freud

casingpoint wrote:

Remember, if it saves one life, it's worth it.

Tens of thousands of U.S. military personnel have died defending the rights of Americans, including the Fourth Amendment. And you say a willful violation of the Fourth by police is suddenly acceptable if it saves a life?

That reads like the cops know best, they will take care of you, you don't need to defend yourself anymore.

I believe Jim forgot the sarcasm smilie.

This one needs to get serious & back to a "G" rating.
One post deleated.
Another one & it will be locked.
LT

LarryH wrote:I believe Jim forgot the sarcasm smilie.

Thanks. That is correct.

I support every jot and tittle of the Bill of Rights and all the unenumerated rights.

I was trying to point out that if said scholar wants to eliminate rights, eliminating the 4th amendment would be more effective than eliminating the 2nd.

Eliminating the 5th would be even better. Then the authorities could just throw people in jail if they looked like they might commit a crime.

- Jim

longtooth wrote:This one needs to get serious & back to a "G" rating.
One post deleated.
Another one & it will be locked.
LT

What did I miss?

Oldgringo wrote:

longtooth wrote:This one needs to get serious & back to a "G" rating.
One post deleated.
Another one & it will be locked.
LT

What did I miss?

Deleated
Go review the rules on inuendo.

chabouk wrote:

Oldgringo wrote:

longtooth wrote:This one needs to get serious & back to a "G" rating.
One post deleated.
Another one & it will be locked.
LT

What did I miss?

Deleated

Deleated.

Inuendo.