JH
- 1
- revisión
- 11
- votos útiles
- 19
- calificaciones
-
Armed in America
- A History of Gun Rights from Colonial Militias to Concealed Carry
- De: Patrick J. Charles
- Narrado por: Timothy Andrés Pabon
- Duración: 12 h y 43 m
- Versión completa
-
General
-
Narración:
-
Historia
This illuminating study traces the transformation of the right to arms from its inception in English and colonial American law to today's impassioned gun-control debate. As historian and legal scholar Patrick J. Charles shows, what the right to arms means to Americans, as well as what it legally protects, has changed drastically since its first appearance in the 1689 Declaration of Rights. Armed in America explores how and why the right to arms transformed at different points in history. The right was initially meant to serve as a parliamentary right of resistance.
-
-
Incorrect Facts = Refund at Chapter 2
- De JH en 11-04-18
- Armed in America
- A History of Gun Rights from Colonial Militias to Concealed Carry
- De: Patrick J. Charles
- Narrado por: Timothy Andrés Pabon
Incorrect Facts = Refund at Chapter 2
Revisado: 11-04-18
The author spends the entire first chapter talking about how he went to such great lengths to check all of his facts and ensure that everything he presents is nothing but the truth to the best of his ability. With that kind of introduction, I found it amazing that at Chapter 2 2:09, he goes on to talk about how the shooters in the San Bernadino shooting performed their attack with "legally purchased assault rifles." 1) Those rifles were not purchased legally- it was a strawman purchase because the terrorist themselves thought that they would not pass a background check. Please reference LA Times article from 12/16/15 for further details. Secondly, the author uses the term "assault rifle," whereas this is a US Army term denoting "a selective-fire rifle chambered for a cartridge of intermediate power." Since the rifles they purchased were only semi-automatic and not a selective fire type a la the US Army, they were not "assault rifles" and thus, the statement is false.
This may seem like petty pedantry, but if you're going to boast on how factually correct your book is (especially after saying that most of the commentary in the Heller case was incorrect), you shouldn't have such a glaring mistake in the next chapter. While I'm sure there are some great points in the book, I do not have the desire to fact check each and every one of this author's claims since that defeats the purpose of this book's intended aim. A shame, too, as I did enjoy the narrarator's performance.
Thank goodness for Audible's return policy.
Se ha producido un error. Vuelve a intentarlo dentro de unos minutos.
Has calificado esta reseña.
Reportaste esta reseña
esto le resultó útil a 10 personas