Dershowitz on: Is Baldwin guilty of homicide?
<a href="https://www.newsweek.com/whos-culpable-baldwin-shooting-opinion-1643069?amp=1">https://www.newsweek.com/whos-<wbr>culpable-baldwin-shooting-opin<wbr>ion-1643069?amp=1</a>
Discussion about this post
No posts
Thank you for your analysis. It makes it perfectly clear.
What a fascinating read. Very interesting. One line did stick out to me: “the second amendment is not for movie sets”. Rather than diminish the value of the second amendment wouldn’t “movie sets are not for live guns” be more appropriate? Again, rather than diminish the importance of an constitutional amendment, why not give the power to movie sets (or the industry) to decide (which they absolutely should) to have the right to ban all live ammunition capable weapons from a workplace? People make the claim that in some cases the first amendment can equate to violence. Is the second amendment a less-than because of its perceived or inherent risk? If one amendment is not allowed on set (or similar environment) can it be applied equally to all amendments? Can we say the fourth amendment is not for movie sets if we’re able to say the second isn’t as well?