1. | Dec 14, 2013

Allowing only open carry while prohibiting cnoaecled carry is the second worst possible legal condition for the general populace - short of total prohibition on carry.This is so because if the criminal knows for sure that those without a visible gun are defenseless, he will be able to pick a defenseless victim every time.If both cnoaecled and open-carry are allowed, he will only be able to pick a defenseless victim some of the time. In that case it will be the luck of the draw, so to speak.And if no carry is allowed, then he will be able to attack anyone, because in that case every law-abiding citizen is defenseless.Of course, if he is unlucky he might run into a non-law-abiding citizen who happens to be carrying.As such, it is correct for citizens to oppose laws requiring open-carry because they force citizens to visually identify their defensibility, thus allowing the victimizer to cherry-pick his victims, and further denying those who are unwilling or unable to carry the 'virtual protection' offered by a cnoaecled-carry environment.

2. | Dec 13, 2013

Dear Professor,If the ICTY dealing with cases of comnptet against it raises questions of jurisdiction, doesn't the problem arise for the ECHR dealing with a case of freedom of expression related to an ICTY decision?Many thanks!

3. | Nov 24, 2013

etot kurginyan sladot rothschildov! ego tozhe raskrutshiwaut w Rossii dlja psewdosozialisma po trotskomu (nowi tolpolitarism) i raswala Rossii (revoluzia kak eto uzhe bilo) Info pro kurginyana na KPE.  ru !!!Dmitri Slawoljubov ..wash bibleiski projekt w rasnowidnoi forme skoro prowaliza i washa psewdowlast (kapitalism, pwsewdosozialism gde toka elita rulit a ne narod..) isbrannix balnix skoro bolshe nebudet