Open Source Defense is one of my favorite substacks to read. A lot of interesting and insightful commentary for the pro-2A crowd.
I’ve privately shared various posts with friends and colleagues (across the political spectrum) when they were relevant to a particular discussion or issue.
This specific OSD post highlights apparent absurdity in federal firearms law. They creatively juxtaposed an outrageous arrest in the U.K. with seemingly similar cases in the U.S. (And extra points for citing Professor Eugene Volohk.)
In my class at William S. Boyd School of Law, University of Nevada-Las Vegas, we often talk about logical inconsistencies in the law.
I myself am a bit more sanguine about the issue. (I’m by nature a forgiving guy.) The law is a human construct and like us, it’s destined to be imperfect.
Experience has taught me that it is challenging—maybe nigh on impossible—to draft a law that captures all the bad conduct we want to prevent or punish while excluding all innocent conduct.
We should, of course, refine the law when flaws appear. There’s never a good time to tolerate injustice.
Until we can achieve perfection in the law, however, we depend on human judgment to apply it. That falls to prosecutors (who are my favorite type of lawyer), the defense attorneys who check them (and get an unfairly bad rap), and all the other people that play a part in our “system.”
There are always exceptions, but I think the law (as applied by people) generally gets it right.