To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 1008
1007  |  1009
Subject: 
Re: New Web Page
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Fri, 21 May 1999 15:07:19 GMT
Reply-To: 
(c576653@cclabs)SayNoToSpam(.missouri.edu)
Viewed: 
986 times
  
Mr L F Braun wrote:

   But who are "the people?"  Jefferson and Co. meant "white
  male property owners," but didn't say it because it didn't need
   to be said in a patriarchal society.  Are we to revert to their
   definition of people as well?  And equality in quantity or quality?
   Or both?  It wasn't much of an issue until the late 19th century,
   granted.

"The people" - then and now - are whatever people we assume the
constatution governs.  That has clearly changed.  I don't have answers
to the fine points (e.g. are illegal aliens part of the people?) but I
think that we can comfortably agree that it includes voting US citizens.
If they had meant the states, they would have said so, this is
demonstrated by use of that term elsewhere.

   And...cannon on a ship are different than cannon in
   your barn.  The weapon itself might be the same,
   but the justification is different.

That's true.  And I don't have accounts from the time of individual
ownership, to contrast.  By the time of the War Between the States, and
I assume it was common practice before, individuals funded combat units
for both sides and lead them sort of like free mercenaries.  These
people had cannon and were private militia.  What was the role and
commonality of this sort of activity during the colonial/revolutionary period?

   were kept in reserve at artillery parks or armories,
   just as they are today, and issued to the militia
   at the time of mobilization.  Had the right to bear

And those militia were controlled/directed by locals rather than a
central autonomous well organized institution with instantaneous
communications.

   True.  But isn't the National Guard also atomized by
  state except in event of a national call-up?  I consider
   that a "militia."

Wasn't it more of a county-sized operation?  A state - even those little
NE states were a big area to command without electronic communication.
If someone in my community - someone that I could get an appointment to
see - had control of the big guns and was an equal decision maker with a
bunch of other county military reps, I would be more comfortable.  But,
I would still suggest that I have the right to arms as guarenteed by the second.

Well, I think that's true.  Sorry.  (I just hope we don't stop here,
cause it's not good enough.)

   I'll agree that it's the best enumerated system
  we have, but it's not the only possible path.
   We can't exist if everyone is like us--Immanuel
   Wallerstein (among others) has shown that
   pretty effectively.  For us, it's fine and I agree
   with you--but for the rest of the world?  No.

But how can we know that they are proceding to something that will work
for them, and for us?

Published by the Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy.  Kates is
a criminologist and Civil Rights Lawyer, and Kleck is a professor at the
School of Criminology and Criminal Justice at Florida State University.

   Did PRIPP fund the research itself, or just publish

It doesn't say.

  the results?  If the former, the story of its genesis
   is suspect--PRIPP is a very deregulation-friendly
   think tank.  From Yearbook News:

But, everyone who might have funded it has some kind of bias.  Does it
mean that all funded research is suspect?  Or only that research
seemingly contradictory to the desires of the publishers is valid?  (I'm
even in agreement that it's suspect, but where does that leave us?)

Pacific Research Institute is a nonprofit
organization which seeks to promote the
principles of individual freedom and personal
responsibility through the encouragement of
policies that emphasize a free economy, private
initiative and limited government. The Institute
focuses on policy issues such as education,
technology, welfare, environment, law economics
and healthcare.

Thanks, that's cool.

--
Sincerely,

Christopher L. Weeks
central Missouri, USA



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: New Web Page
 
(...) The Massachusetts militia were organized by towns. I think under an elected officer. The towns of course were (and still are) governed by open town meeting (total democracy).I don't recall how a leader was chosen when the militia of several (...) (26 years ago, 21-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: New Web Page
 
Hi again, (...) I try only to make stuff up when it's inconsequential. ;) My "field" isn't early US/18th C. Britain, it's later, so all I have is ancillary knowledge and methodological things. I'm in agreement with the "they had different worries" (...) (26 years ago, 21-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

298 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR