decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Here is a list (or the start of one)... in these links might be more to the story? | 337 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Who Is Too Unbalanced to Be Armed?
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 27 2012 @ 07:12 AM EST
"A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should
have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from
any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own
government."
- George Washington

"The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms
is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in
government."
- Thomas Jefferson

"Arms in the hands of citizens may be used at individual discretion in
private self defense."
- John Adams

"To disarm the people is the most effectual way to enslave them."
- George Mason

"The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert
that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by
themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed."
- Thomas Jefferson

"Americans have the right and advantage of being armed, unlike the people
of other countries, whose leaders are afraid to trust them with arms."
- James Madison

"This may be considered as the true palladium of liberty.... The right of
self defense is the first law of nature: in most governments it has been the
study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest limits possible.
Wherever standing armies are kept up, and the right of the people to keep and
bear arms is, under any color or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not
already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction."
- St. George Tucker

"The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the
United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms."
- Samuel Adams

"The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been
considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a
strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and
will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the
people to resist and triumph over them."
- Joseph Story

"The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They
disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes....
Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants;
they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may
be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
- Thomas Jefferson (quoting 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria)

So you believe a fictional story by Douglas Adams should carry more weight than
the carefully thought out opinions of our founding fathers?

And just who is to arbitrate the question of which people have the right to own
guns? The people who want impose their own will and political agenda are the
people who want to take them away from citizens.



[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Here is a list (or the start of one)... in these links might be more to the story?
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 27 2012 @ 09:06 AM EST
Again,

What other lowest common denominators can we detect to expose, or at least introduce to the discussion?

No stone should be left unturned - we need to look in all the deep dark corners, to discover what lies there, that we can not usually see. AND, then we need to openly discuss it all, everything (to fix, you need to look at the entire picture).

http://davidhealy.org/t he-story-of-ssri- stories/

http://ssristories.com/

And, this, in the next link, was written about over 10 years ago (same stories, only now ten years later, we still are not looking at them seriously, and including them in the discussion of "how to fix" the problem).
ht tp://www.drugawareness.org/prozac-panacea-or- pandora/the- aftermath

A-N -D, we can save the very best, or most interesting link, for last...
This guy in the short video (link below), at risk of lible and slander, had 3 labs confirm the cause of the start of the Autism Epidemic (many kids on SSRIs are Autistic). SHOCKING.

http://www.youtube.com/watch? v=hZVi3M_OiCo

WOW, just imagine, if that "research document" was not sealed at the FDA over 30 years ago (how many kids might not have been harmed by this stuff"? That is, if he and the 3 labs he used to confirm the research, are correct?

Maybe we need to have an official Congressional investigation, if needed, into why that paper was sealed when it showed that there were indeed birth defects in the lab animals in an area of the brain that is where it is the same area of the brain that affects Autism. The researcher says in the video that he can "PROVE" this to be true.

The next step, if what he says is not true, is for the companies named in his written work, to step up, get the courts to get an injunction against this guy, and then sue him for slander and/or libel into financial oblivion. Why will they not sue, why just imagine what would pop up in "discovery" maybe?
If true, then many other labs could also confirm, and well change the game to reflect the research. However, the questions remain, as to how to fix the 30 years of damage to the hearts of mothers all over the world (this stuff is used world-wide)..., and to fix the brains of those affected?

Certainly, those at risk, who might be not allowed a gun, would be, after a review of some kind by a group of professionals... a percentage of the affected population who are affected by the above links (at the very least, a bell curve might exist), not only in the US, but other places too?

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

By the same token..
Authored by: myNym on Thursday, December 27 2012 @ 01:48 PM EST
Anybody who wants to be able to go outside ought not be
allowed.

Anybody who wants free speech ought not be allowed.

Anybody who doesn't want to be a slave to the federal
government ought not be allowed to opt out.

Tell you what, anybody who feels the streets are too
dangerous because of guns, please check yourselves into the
nearest padded cell. After all, you can all find gainful
employment in the Interweb, right? No need to go outside at
all.

My apologies to those that are truly agoraphobic and who
read this. I am not trying in any way to make light of your
plight. The above is intended to be a thought experiment
for those who have trouble seeing the end result of their
temporary wishes.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Who Is Too Unbalanced to Be Armed?
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 27 2012 @ 03:38 PM EST
By the same token (and going back to the origin of your analogy), anyone who
wants to decide who should be prohibited from doing something should be
excluded from deciding so. I think you can see the circular reasoning inherent
in this.

The idea which Adams used is an old joke with many variations that has probably
been around for centuries, if not longer. It's a joke because it obviously *is*
absurd.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Logic Error!
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 27 2012 @ 03:45 PM EST
Based on that logic:

Anyone who wants to wear a seatbelt should
automatically be excluded from wearing a seat belt.

Anyone who wants to lock their front door should
automatically be excluded from locking their front door.

cc

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Defense Against Oppressive Government
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 27 2012 @ 10:30 PM EST
Does that have anything to do with the assassination
of four presidents, or the six others who were shot at
but missed or survived their wounds? I'm not counting
bombings or would be perps prevented before the act.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

    Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
    All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
    Comments are owned by the individual posters.

    PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )