What Arms for Whom Where? – Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership

Those who define the terms of debate control the debate. I am a purveyor of words and a student of etymology. In the past, I have long supported the American habit of inventing new words and new uses for old words. It was a practice that served us well especially as we entered the information age and technology demanded a much larger vocabulary than that which people needed just a few decades ago. However, we have gone beyond the limits of technological need when we begin redefining words that we rely on to support a common understanding of social mores and laws. Once upon a time, students and practitioners of law relied on Latin to inculcate stability in judicial interpretations of law because it was a "dead language" - not used in the vernacular of everyday life - and thus, terms were stable. Stare decisis would mean the same thing today and tomorrow as it meant yesterday. Imagine how difficult life would be if interpretations of law changed. Actually, it's not hard to imagine. It's happening and we're having to live with those changes...

Very informative and somewhat disheartening read SGT (Join to see)! I was aware of some of the old laws on the books; however, the s Information was definitely news to me!

Assuming that ACB gets confirmed to the SCOTUS, one of the first things that needs to be addressed is the inconsistent patchwork of gun laws in this country. We don't need a guidebook of motor-vehicle laws to guide us as we drive freely around the country, and driving is a privilege, not a right, so we should have even more freedom to exercise our RIGHT to keep and bear arms.