Excuse me but your little diatribe here reminds me of Roseanna Roseanna Danna's rants. I'm not sure whether you aren't able to remember who you quoted, or whether you think I'm not able to remember it, but this is another attempt at what I call the "yeah but..." deflection technique.I'm sorry - Blackstone was enormously influential on Jefferson and the Declaration as well as the later Constitution and its even later Bill of Rights.
Thomas Jefferson reflected Black-stone's view when he used the phrase "law of nature and of nature's God" in the Declaration. This phrase indicates that Jefferson understood the difference between Blackstone's theory and that of Grotius and Cicero. The law of nature refers to the will of God observable in creation while the law of nature's God refers to the divine law which is revealed through the Scriptures.
While Jefferson affirmed Blackstone's view of natural law, he abhorred the influence of Blackstone in the adoption of the English common law in the Colonies. Because of Jefferson's significant role in the founding of America, it is necessary to discern precisely where he agreed with Blackstone as well as where he disagreed.
And...
II. the influence of Blackstone on the Constitution
A. No Taxation Without Representation
In a sense, the Declaration was a document listing grievances against a government which the Signers believed had failed to operate in accordance with the laws of nature. Chief among the grievances listed in the Declaration was the fact that King George violated the "laws of nature and of nature's God" by "imposing taxes on us without our consent."
Colonies were taxed but denied representation in Parliament. In contrast, the Constitution documents how the Founding Fathers believed that an ideal government, in submission to the law of nature, should operate. Accordingly, the Constitution sought to remedy the taxation problem by requiring in Article I, Section 7, that bills for revenue originate in the House of Representatives, the body of government closest to the American people.16
B. The Unalienable Right to Property
An understanding of Blackstone's beliefs on property rights is impossible apart from an understanding of his beliefs on happiness, for he believed that the latter depended on the former. Blackstone stated that a right to property "tends to man's real happiness, and therefore justly concluding that...it is a part of the law of nature." 17 Likewise, according to Blackstone, the converse is true-denial of property rights is "destructive of man's real happiness, and therefore the law of nature forbids it." 18
Richard A. Huenefeld has noted the following concerning Blackstone's influence on the Founding Fathers' view of property rights:
The influential Blackstone said that the right of private property "consists in the free use, enjoyment, and disposal of all [personal] acquisitions." While he spoke of the "sacred and inviolable rights of private property," he equivocated concerning the origin and nature of property rights.
He indicated that the "origin of private property is probably found in nature," but that much of this natural liberty was sacrificed in order to enjoy society's protection of it. Apparently he was uncertain whether to adopt a law of nature position or a social compact theory.
Blackstone turned to the revealed law of God for "the only true and solid foundation of man's dominion over external things." He referred to Genesis chapter one wherein the Creator gave man "dominion over all the earth." From this, Blackstone considered this common ownership sufficient for only a short time as the growth of population led to conflicts over the subject of dominion.
He adopted a social compact theory, asserting that "necessity begat property," meaning that civil laws recognizing the institution of property were needed for beneficial resolution of conflicts. He modified his social compact theory by holding that "bodily labor, bestowed upon any subject which before lay in common to all men, is universally allowed to give the fairest and most reasonable title to an exclusive property therein."19
When the Framers engrafted the right to property into the Constitution-with all of its complexities and exceptions-the theories of Blackstone were, without a doubt, of paramount influence.
C. The Unalienable Right of Self-Defense
Blackstone's view of the right to bear arms is stated in the following quote:
The fifth and last auxiliary right of the subject, that I shall at present mention, is that of having arms for their defense . . . which is also declared by the same statute 1 W. & M. st. 2, C. 2, and it is indeed, a public allowance under due restrictions, of the natural right of resistance and self-preservation. 20
The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution provides that a "well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." 21 The question of the source of this principle is difficult because of the extensive history of debate in England and virtually every other society which has attempted to maintain a balance between anarchy and oppressive government.
However, it is safe to say that the American belief in the right to bear arms has its roots in "civil jurists of the period who had specifically dealt with the question of self-defense as a natural right." 22
It has been noted that their doctrine stemmed essentially from the traditional view of suicide as a sin and perhaps as the ultimate sin. To them a failure to defend yourself against an unlawful aggression amounted to suicide by inaction. If a person's life is a gift of the Creator and he cannot destroy it by action, he cannot destroy it by inaction or negligence.
If life is not the private property of the person living, then it is not his to destroy or allow to be destroyed: you may voluntarily acquiesce to robbery; you may not voluntarily acquiesce to murder.23
III. conclusion
It is not coincidental that the ideas in the Declaration of Independence and Constitution were espoused less than a decade after Blackstone's Commentaries first appeared in print in England. The correlation between the philosophy of America's founding documents and the Commentaries is worthy of careful exploration.
The OP is about extra-capacity magazines.
To be clear: the "natural rights is nonsense on stilts" quote that YOU referenced was stated by Jeremy Bentham - not Blackstone.
All of the above is about Blackstone - whose ideas SUPPORTED natural rights and who was an influence on Jefferson, and no doubt many of our other founding fathers.
Jeremy Bentham on the other hand is the non-believer in "natural rights". His beliefs were NOT influential on the founding fathers.
So this is where you say "OH! NEVERMIIIIND!"
Unless you are going to once again just gloss over this refutation of the drivel you've posted and move on to your next "yeah but..." deflection.
Last edited: