Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Tue, 1 Jul 2008 12:30:32 -0400 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Henry Weincek says that mine was "rather a sweeping statement." Note,
however, that I said that "MOST people who find themselves invoking rights
do so for unsavory reasons." Thus, it wasn't a sweeping statement at all.
For my take on the gun rights case, which I think was decided incorrectly
(but about which the losing side's arguments were wrong, too), see
http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2008/03/18/gun-control-the-second-amendment/
Kevin Gutzman
Henry Wiencek <[log in to unmask]>
Sent by: Discussion of research and writing about Virginia history
<[log in to unmask]>
07/01/2008 11:52 AM
Please respond to
Discussion of research and writing about Virginia history
<[log in to unmask]>
To
[log in to unmask]
cc
Subject
[VA-HIST] Rights talk
Prof. Gutzman writes: "My analysis is that most
people who find themselves invoking rights do so for unsavory reasons (to
get away with murdering an ex-wife, say, as in O.J.'s case), and that's
what we should expect; after all, it's the political/moral minority that
has to fall back on rights talk."
That's a rather sweeping statement. Would you apply it to the gun rights
folks who just won the big decision? Not a hostile question; merely
asking.
Henry Wiencek
______________________________________
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions
at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html
______________________________________
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html
|
|
|