Hobbit@Law

Looking carefully at that which is unseen.

Talking about: Brian’s BUT…….

Blogroll Honors Member Brian Wilson has a post on LewRockwell that nails some language use “in the but,” so to speak. Listening to what people say, how they say it, or often what they don’t say is an essential part of my work, and, as Brian points out, the quibbles and caveats that come in “after the but” are indeed a true test of what a person is actually thinking.on a subject. I don’t hold myself out as any exception to the rule, either. For instance:

The Second Amendment to the US Constitution iterates the normal human right to keep and bear arms, BUT there is a good argument that the “arms” kept and borne should be consistent with what the Founders saw at the time – i.e.individuals have an unfettered and absolute right to keep and bear such arms as may be appropriate for light infantry. Heavy weapons such as tanks, artillery, A-10 Warthogs, and nuclear devices are reserved for group ownership. This comports reasonably well where expensive and very damaging weapons, like artillery, were generally owned by a “company” of sorts.

But (there’s that word again, a quibble to my caveat) if the only choice were to be between “nobody gets so much as a sharp stick” (cf. “Modern England”) and “atom bombs all around,” I’d opt for the second without even thinking twice.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: