Welcome to the Coatesville Dems Blog

Public Corruption in Chester County, PA

I believe an unlikely mix of alleged drug trafficking related politicos and alleged white nationalist related politicos united to elect the infamous “Bloc of Four” in the abysmal voter turnout election of 2005. During their four year term the drug business was good again and white nationalists used Coatesville as an example on white supremacist websites like “Stormfront”. Strong community organization and support from law enforcement, in particular Chester County District Attorney Joseph W. Carroll has begun to turn our community around. The Chester County drug trafficking that I believe centers on Coatesville continues and I believe we still have public officials in place that profit from the drug sales. But the people here are amazing and continue to work against the odds to make Coatesville a good place to live.

Friday, October 29, 2021

The Statute of Northampton of 1328 is the historic basis for current gun laws. In 1328 a “hand cannon or “hand gonne” was the state of the art hand weapon. In 2021 one AR can kill everyone in a courtroom in less than 1 minute.


Hand cannon.JPG

Turkish Hand Cannon  CC BY-SA 3.0Link


The Statute of Northampton of 1328 remains central to the current debate surrounding the limits and protections the Second Amendment provides to carry arms in public.[1] The Statute provided that “no man great nor small, of what condition soever he be, except the king’s servants in his presence…come before the King’s justices, or other of the King’s ministers doing their office, with force and arms, nor bring no force in affray of the peace, nor to go nor ride armed by night nor by day, in fairs, markets, nor in the presence of the justices or other ministers” (2 Edw. 3, c.3). Certain Second Amendment scholars hold that the Statute was “not interpreted literally” and was only enforced when weapons were carried with the intent to terrify or threaten or when dangerous and unusual weapons were carried.[2] While the Statute has been much studied, some key sources remain neglected, namely the reliance of Sir. Edward Coke on 13th Century English legal scholar Henry de Bracton in Coke’s interpretation of the Statute. Coke’s quotations from de Bracton, which have usually been ignored because they are written almost entirely in Latin, offer additional evidence that the Statute of Northampton was understood to be a broad-based prohibition on the carrying of arms.

MORE AT:

MORE AT:

DUKE CENTER FOR FIREARMS LAW


Observations Regarding the Interpretation and Legacy of the Statute of Northampton in Anglo-American Legal History





In 1328 the only hand carried firearm was a “gonne or handgonne.” A metal tube with a hole in one end to light with a wick.


The hand cannon (Chinese: shŏuchòng, or huŏchòng, French: escopette), also known as the gonne or handgonne, is the first true firearm and the successor of the fire lance.[1] It is the oldest type of small arms as well as the most mechanically simple form of metal barrel firearms. Unlike matchlock firearms it requires direct manual external ignition through a touch hole without any form of firing mechanism. It may also be considered a forerunner of the handgun. The hand cannon was widely used in China from the 13th century onward and later throughout Eurasia in the 14th century. In 15th century Europe, the hand cannon evolved to become the matchlock arquebus, which became the first firearm to have a trigger.[2]



60 MINUTES

The explosive force of AR-15 style rifles

Nov 4, 2018






From The Washington Post Courts and Law

At issue is New York’s requirement that a gun owner obtain a special license to carry by satisfying local authorities that the gun owner has “proper cause” for doing so. Seven other states — California, Delaware, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey and Rhode Island have similar laws.

The two people challenging the law — Robert Nash and Brandon Koch — have licenses to carry handguns for hunting and target practice. But New York authorities denied their requests for “unrestricted” licenses for self-defense because officials said they could not show a “special need for self-protection distinguishable from that of the general community.”

During the two-year period of 2018 and 2019, at least 65 percent of applicants in New York were approved for an “unrestricted” license, according to a state analysis of records submitted to the court.

The challengers — joined by the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, an NRA affiliate — want the justices to overturn a ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit saying that the state’s regulations do not violate the Second Amendment and are consistent with the government’s interest in public safety and crime prevention.

At times, the dueling sides examine in their briefs the same founding-era statutes, court rulings and even 14th-century English law. Both quote the Statute of Northampton — the ancient law that prohibited people from traveling armed “by night nor by day” and in places where people were likely to gather such as “fairs” and “markets.”

But they have different interpretations and reach opposite conclusions.

Clement, the lawyer for the gun owners, says there is a broad right to carry in public for self-defense.

“When the founding generation enshrined that right in the Constitution, it understood the right to entitle the people to ‘have arms for their own defence’ and ‘use them for lawful purposes’ wherever the need should ‘occur,’ ” according Clement’s brief.

Founding father Patrick Henry went armed in town on his way to court in early America, the court filing states, and John Adams defended the right to go armed in Boston.

Even those assertions are being disputed by gun-control advocates in a new report titled “Historical Myth-Making and the Second Amendment: Founders and Firearms.”

New York Attorney General Letitia James (D) says 700 years of history, “from the Middle Ages onward,” including “laws on both sides of the Atlantic broadly restricted the public carrying of firearms and other deadly weapons, particularly in populous places,” and that New York’s law is “less restrictive” than the measures in place before the founding era.

Striking down New York’s law, James said, would jeopardize firearm restrictions that other states and the federal government have in place at courthouses and airports, and in subways, houses of worship, bars and other settings.

New York’s position is backed by more than a dozen professors of English and American history who say limitations on carrying firearms in public are “of ancient vintage.” Saul Cornell, a Fordham University professor, said those challenging the law are wrong on the history. They fail to acknowledge, he said, the “staggering array” of gun laws enacted in the post-Civil War era, including permitting laws and bans on concealed carry.

MORE AT:

Washington Post

In battle at Supreme Court over N.Y. gun law, a surprising split among conservatives

Ann E. Marimow5:00 a.m. EDT


No comments:

Post a Comment

You can add your voice to this blog by posting a comment.