On Apr 30, 2009, at 6:33 PM, Volokh, Eugene wrote:
Andrews v. State, 50 Tenn. 165 (1871), struck down a statute banning
open carrying of handguns, on the grounds that the state right to bear
arms provision protected such carrying. But in State v. Wilburn, 66
Tenn. 57 (1872), the court upheld a similar statute because it had
exactly one exception-for army pistols carried "openly in the hand."
That seems like a remarkable result, given how impractical it is to
carry a handgun openly in one's hands for any length of time. But
it's
so remarkable that it makes me wonder whether I'm missing some
possible
idiomatic meaning of "openly in the hand" (or for that matter some
important change in Tennessee Supreme Court personnel from 1871 to
1872). Thanks,
Whenever you see "one exception" for "army (or navy) pistols," think
racial discrimination. This was the Reconstruction equivalent of a
"Saturday night special ban." Only the most expensive pistols were
protected, leaving the lower classes disarmed.
Perhaps the "in the hand" wording was there to help legalize the night-
time activities of various hooded societies, whose meetings were
usually brief and to the point enough to make such carry practical,
and among whom the army and navy pistols were de rigeur.
--
Escape the Rat Race for Peace, Quiet, and Miles of Desert Beauty
Take a Sanity Break at The Bunkhouse at Liberty Haven Ranch
http://libertyhavenranch.com
_______________________________________________
To post, send message to [email protected]
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/firearmsregprof
Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.
Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can
read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the
messages to others.
