Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

LinuxPlanet Interviews Robert Bork

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the weighty-opinions dept.

Greg writes: "Robert Bork, former Supreme Court appointee from the Reagan era and a recent entrant in the MS antitrust case, did an interview over at LinuxPlanet. The topic? The Evil Empire's court settlement." Bork isn't actually new to the Microsoft case or to the subject of monopolies -- his legal experience makes this an interesting read, even for those who don't consider Microsoft an "evil empire."

4 of 276 comments (clear)

  1. This may be Off Topic, but... by karmma · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Every time I hear the name Robert Bork, I can't help but think of The Swedish Chef.

  2. Re:See also the second amendment... by Bob_Robertson · · Score: 3, Offtopic

    A well educated citizenry being necessary to the sucess of a free state, the right of the people to keep and read books shall not be infringed.

    So we can only keep and read books that relate to education? We can only keep and read books that are permitted by the state?

    The most apalling interpretation is that the right is somehow "granted", when it specifically says that the right shall not be infringed. The plain english is that government cannot "grant", it can only "infringe" on a pre-existing right.

    Offtopic, here I come.

    Bob-

    --
    The Ludwig von Mises Institute. The reasoning individuals economics
  3. Re:See also the second amendment... by jazman_777 · · Score: 2, Offtopic
    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.

    You can read this in few ways.


    Ah, but if you read "People" as different from the "State", you just may notice some interesting things about the Bill of Rights. There is an implicit difference between the people and the state. The people are the mass of riff-raff of which we are a part. The state is the government. And they are different entities (if the people can be considered some entity).


    With that in mind, I think there's something to the notion that the average member of the riff-raff has a right to have a gun (any gun), and thereby becomes part of the militia, which can thereby be regulated by the state (the taking away of guns or limiting their ownership being contradictory to the existence of the militia).


    Maybe we just ought to amend the constitution to make it absolutely clear what this friggin' 2nd amendment really means. There is a constitutional process in place for that.

    --
    Slashdot: Failed Car Analogies. Amateur Lawyering. Anecdote Battles.
  4. Was I the only dyslexic that read this as Bjork? by t0qer · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Goin for a cheap funny. C'mon mods give it up!