scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Stephen P. Halbrook

Bio: Stephen P. Halbrook is an academic researcher from The Independent Institute. The author has contributed to research in topics: Constitution & Right to keep and bear arms. The author has an hindex of 6, co-authored 19 publications receiving 118 citations. Previous affiliations of Stephen P. Halbrook include Valparaiso University & University of Tennessee.

Papers
More filters
Book
01 Jan 1984
TL;DR: The first scholarly book on the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, That Every Man Be Armed, has played a significant role in constitutional debate and litigation since it was first published in 1984 as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: That Every Man Be Armed , the first scholarly book on the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, has played a significant role in constitutional debate and litigation since it was first published in 1984. Halbrook traces the right to bear arms from ancient Greece and Rome to the English republicans, then to the American Revolution and Constitution, through the Reconstruction period extending the right to African Americans, and onward to today's controversies. With reviews of recent literature and court decisions, this new edition ensures that Halbrook's study remains the most comprehensive general work on the right to keep and bear arms.

37 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Halbrook as mentioned in this paper is a member of the bar of Virginia, the District of Columbia, and various federal courts and is the author of that every man be armed: the evolution of a CONSTITUTIONal right.
Abstract: Copyright (c) 1986 by Law and Contemporary Problems. J.D., Georgetown University Law Center, 1978; Ph.D. (Philosophy), Florida State University, 1972. A practicing attorney with offices in Fairfax, Virginia, the author is a member of the bars of Virginia, the District of Columbia, and various federal courts. 1 R. FROTHINGHAM, HISTORY OF THE SIEGE OF BOSTON 95 (6th ed. 1903). 2 The Declaration, passed on July 6, 1775, is reprinted, among other places, in Connecticut Courant, July 17, 1775, at 2 (quote taken from col. 3). 3 Id. at 4, col. 1. 4 Kates, Handgun prohibition and the original meaning of the Second Amendment, 82 MICH. L. REV. 204, 267 (1983). [Copyright © 1986 Law & Contemporary Problems. Originally published as 49 LAW & CONTEMP. PROBS. 151-162 (1986). For educational use only. The printed edition remains canonical. For citational use please obtain a back issue from William S. Hein & Co., 1285 Main Street, Buffalo, New York 14209; 716-882-2600 or 800-828-7571. Dr. Halbrook is the author of THAT EVERY MAN BE ARMED: THE EVOLUTION OF A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT which may be obtained from www.amazon.com.]

16 citations

Journal Article
TL;DR: There is a hidden history of the Second Amendment which is long overdue to be written as mentioned in this paper, and it is worth noting that during the ratification period of 1787-1791, Congress and the states considered two entirely separate groups of amendments to the Constitution: the first group was a declaration of rights, in which the right of the people to keep and bear arms appeared.
Abstract: There is a hidden history of the Second Amendment which is long overdue to be written. It is this: during the ratification period of 1787-1791, Congress and the states considered two entirely separate groups of amendments to the Constitution. The first group was a declaration of rights, in which the right of the people to keep and bear arms appeared. The second group, consisting of amendments related to the structure of government, included recognition of the power of states to maintain militias. The former became the Bill of Rights, while the latter was defeated. 3 Somehow, through some Orwellian rewriting (pg.132) of history, as applied to the issues of the right of the people to keep and bear arms and the state militia power, that which was defeated has become the meaning of that which was adopted.

8 citations

01 Jan 1981
TL;DR: Halbrook as mentioned in this paper is a member of the Virginia State Bar and of several United States Courts, the author received his J.D. from Georgetown University Law Center in 1978, and his Ph.D in Philosophy from Florida State University in 1972.
Abstract: A member of the Virginia State Bar and of several United States Courts, the author received his J.D. from Georgetown University Law Center in 1978, and his Ph.D. in Philosophy from Florida State University in 1972. An attorney in private practice in Fairfax, Virginia, the author has taught philosophy of law at Tuskegee Institute, Howard University and George Mason University. The author gratefully acknowledges the encouragement given this article by the Institute for Humane Studies, and thanks Dr. David I. Caplan, Esq., Robert J. Dowlut, Esq., George S. Knight, Esq., and Joseph F. Cleary for their comments on this manuscript. 1 Moore v. East Cleveland, 431 U.S. 494, 502 (1977). [Copyright © 1981 George Mason Univ. Law Review. Originally published as 4 GMU L. REV. 1-69 (1981). For educational use only. The printed edition remains canonical. For citational use please obtain a back issue from William S. Hein & Co., 1285 Main Street, Buffalo, New York 14209; 716-882-2600 or 800-828-7571. Dr. Halbrook is the author of THAT EVERY MAN BE ARMED: THE EVOLUTION OF A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT which may be obtained from www.amazon.com.]

8 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this view, a Hobson's choice between anarchy and hierarchy is not necessary because an intermediary structure, here dubbed "negarchy" is also available as mentioned in this paper, which is a theory of security that is superior to realism because it addresses not only threats of war from other states but also the threat of despotism at home.
Abstract: A rediscovery of the long-forgotten republican version of liberal political theory has arresting implications for the theory and practice of international relations. Republican liberalism has a theory of security that is superior to realism, because it addresses not only threats of war from other states but also the threat of despotism at home. In this view, a Hobson's choice between anarchy and hierarchy is not necessary because an intermediary structure, here dubbed “negarchy,” is also available. The American Union from 1787 until 1861 is a historical example. This Philadelphian system was not a real state since, for example, the union did not enjoy a monopoly of legitimate violence. Yet neither was it a state system, since the American states lacked sufficient autonomy. While it shared some features with the Westphalian system such as balance of power, it differed fundamentally. Its origins owed something to particular conditions of time and place, and the American Civil War ended this system. Yet close analysis indicates that it may have surprising relevance for the future of contemporary issues such as the European Union and nuclear governance.

178 citations

Book
01 Jan 2004
TL;DR: In this article, the authors present a set of ten rules for democratizing violence, including the following: 1. Surplus violence 2. Muskets, terrorists 3. Thinking violence 4. Civilisation 5. Barbarism? 6. Why violence? 7. Uncivil wars 8. Ethics 9.
Abstract: 1. Surplus violence 2. Muskets, terrorists 3. Thinking violence 4. Civilisation 5. Barbarism? 6. Why violence? 7. Uncivil wars 8. Ethics 9. Ten rules for democratizing violence.

132 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: AlVIANI et al. as mentioned in this paper proposed a restrictive permit requirement designed and administered to exclude more than 99% of the civilian population from handgun ownership, which was challenged in the United States Supreme Court.
Abstract: LL.B. 1966, Yale Law School. Member of the California, District of Columbia, Missouri and United States Supreme Court Bars. Partner, Benenson, Kates and Hardy (San Francisco office). Of counsel, O'Brien & Hallisey, San Francisco, California. Mr. Kates authored one of the petitions for certiorari in Quilici v. City of Morton Grove. — Ed. The author wishes to thank the following for their assistance: Professors William Van Alstyne (Law, Duke University Law School), Roy Wortman (History, Kenyon College), and Stephen Halbrook (Philosophy, George Mason University); Dr. Joyce Malcolm (Law Fellow, Harvard Law School), Dr. David I. Caplan, Mr. Willis Hannawalt (Pillsbury, Madison and Sutro, San Francisco), and Mr. David Hardy (Office of the Solicitor, U.S. Interior Department, Washington, D.C.). Of course, the responsibility for any errors of fact or interpretation is the author's alone. 1 Such legislation could, for example, take the form of a restrictive permit requirement designed and administered to exclude more than 99% of the civilian population from handgun ownership. On the constitutionality of restrictive permit systems, see notes 253-54 infra and accompanying text. 2 See J. ALVIANI & W. DRAKE, HANDGUN CONTROL: ISSUES AND ALTERNATIVES 48-54 (U.S. Conference of Mayors, 1975) (quoting resolutions to that effect from: The Board of Church and Society, United Methodist Church, Common Cause, National Alliance for Safer Cities, Union of America Hebrew Congregations and Unitarian Universalist Association). [Copyright © 1983 Michigan Law Review. Originally published as 82 MICH. L. REV. 204-273 (1983). For educational use only. The printed edition remains canonical. For citational use please obtain a back issue from William S. Hein & Co., 1285 Main Street, Buffalo, New York 14209; 716-882-2600 or 800-828-7571.]

62 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors employ a generalized version of the apparatus of Marxian historical (production) materialism to construct geopolitics as historical security materialism, in which the forces of destruction, constituted by the interaction of geography and technology, determine the security functionality of different modes of protection.
Abstract: Despite its previous centrality in Western political science, materialist arguments in contemporary theories of security politics are neglected and attenuated due to several political and intellectual developments. The extensive geopolitical literature of the late 19th and early 20th centuries was theoretically unsophisticated, deterministic and reductionist, but it was, along with classical Marxism, a branch of a broader attempt to historicize earlier materialist arguments in response to the industrial and Darwinian revolutions. In order to reformulate geopolitics as a more conceptually robust and sophisticated theory, I employ a generalized version of the apparatus of Marxian historical (production) materialism to construct geopolitics as historical security materialism. In this model, the forces of destruction, constituted by the interaction of geography and technology, determine the security functionality of different modes of protection. Two competing modes of protection, the real-state and the feder...

56 citations

Journal Article
TL;DR: Many of the issues surrounding the Second Amendment debate are raised in particularly sharp relief from the perspective of African-American history as mentioned in this paper, particularly those concerning self-defense, crime, participation in the security of the community, and the wisdom or utility of relying exclusively on the state for protection.
Abstract: Many of the issues surrounding the Second Amendment debate are raised in particularly sharp relief from the perspective of African-American history. With the exception of Native Americans, no people in American history have been more influenced by violence than blacks. Private and public violence maintained slavery. The nation's most destructive conflict ended the "peculiar institution." That all too brief experiment in racial egalitarianism, Reconstruction, was ended by private violence and abetted by Supreme Court sanction Jim Crow was sustained by private violence, often with public assistance. If today the memories of past interracial violence are beginning to fade, they are being quickly replaced by the frightening phenomenon of black-on-black violence, making life all too precarious for poor blacks in inner city neighborhoods. Questions raised by the Second Amendment, particularly those concerning self-defense, crime, participation in the security of the community, and the wisdom or utility of relying exclusively on the state for protection, thus take on a peculiar urgency in light of the modern Afro-American experience.

55 citations