[ExI] Upon pondering your freedoms

[spike]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Damien Broderick [mailto:thespike at satx.rr.com]
> Sent: Friday, July 11, 2008 5:18 PM
> To: spike
> Subject: RE: [ExI] Upon pondering your freedoms
> 
> At 04:55 PM 7/11/2008 -0700, Spike wrote:
> 
> >...
> 
> Yes, that seems clear. Back then, it might have been possible. Today 
> it would be suicide (vide the Branch Davidians...
> 
> Indeed, and hence the call for air passengers to be armed if they 
> choose, let's say...
> 
> "A First Lesson in Geography
> 
> There is a land so far away... Damien Broderick
> 
 
Ja, astute observations all.  I was hoping to channel the ExI-chat
discussion, (the thread that you started, not the more general discussion of
gun laws and gun safety) into helping people understand what the legislature
and the judicial branches actually do, or are supposed to do.  The judicial
branch doesn't need to consider which good person shot herself or how many
cooling corpses the constabulary haul out of the local housing projects.
That data is completely irrelevant for the judges, or rather should be.  The
judge's own attitudes towards shootin arns are completely irrelevant, or
should be.  Their job is strictly defined: to decide what the founders meant
and why, then guide the legislative branch in what laws they can legally
pass full stop.  

The US constitution is an inherited contract, like it or not.  I like it.  I
feel the US constitution is a priceless gift from the forefathers.  I like
strict interpretations of its freedoms and responsibilities.  That's why I
went so ape-overboard on the recent Texas yearners case.  I will not feign
sympathy for them or for what I think they were doing in there, nor will I
feign sympathy for the followers of that old time religion guy from Saudi
Arabia, old whats-his-name, something Akbar I think.  I don't like what
these memes do to people.  But the constitution must be followed carefully
in any case, otherwise the alternative is far worse.

spike