[Cryptography] Cryptography, backdoors and the Second Amendment
Lodewijk andré de la porte
l at odewijk.nl
Sun Oct 12 12:31:57 EDT 2014
On Oct 12, 2014 6:04 PM, "Benjamin Kreuter" <brk7bx at virginia.edu> wrote:
> On Sun, 2014-10-12 at 04:28 +0200, Lodewijk andré de la porte wrote:
> > I never understood this though! Doesn't it significantly weaken the
> > amendment? What could weigh up to constitutional values, and who is
> > authorized to judge? Please don't say politicians...
> Interpretation is an important component of any law, including the
> constitution. Laws are not software, courts are not computers, and
> nobody would want to live in a society where the law is completely
> inflexible. Laws tend to be written non-precisely, and even the bill of
> rights is not so precisely as to require no interpretation at all.
Yes and no, precision of language can be greater and smaller. It's much
overlooked. I find especially computer-related law lacks precision. I also
find that precise law is essential, lest it is not law at all. We also see
that the "intention of the lawmaker" is an important factor.
Finally, we even see laws that depend upon interpretation yet to be given
by judges that may oppose directly. Often we see "fundamental law", eg
human rights, opposing more readily changed law. And the readily changed
law wins easily if polticians interpreted laws in ways that make it simple.
> As for the authority to judge, the answer is that "judges" have that
> authority. Courts exist to settle disputes about the meaning of the law
> and whether or not it is being followed. I would say that some kind of
> court system is necessary for the rule of law.
Ah, but that wasn't the question. A judge must always give precedence to
constitutional laws. How could a judge explain the second amendment such
that machine guns could be illegal?
I suspect that ruling should be exceedingly controversial and dangerous.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the cryptography