<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Law, clarity, and simplicity	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://thenewneo.com/2026/04/15/law-clarityand-simplicity/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://thenewneo.com/2026/04/15/law-clarityand-simplicity/</link>
	<description>A blog about political change, among other things</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 Apr 2026 23:28:04 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=7.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: neo		</title>
		<link>https://thenewneo.com/2026/04/15/law-clarityand-simplicity/#comment-2848375</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[neo]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Apr 2026 23:27:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://thenewneo.com/?p=148602#comment-2848375</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Mr Bill:

Thanks!]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mr Bill:</p>
<p>Thanks!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Mr Bill		</title>
		<link>https://thenewneo.com/2026/04/15/law-clarityand-simplicity/#comment-2848354</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mr Bill]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Apr 2026 20:54:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://thenewneo.com/?p=148602#comment-2848354</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In my profession as an engineer, I used to occasionally have to write something called &quot;operational safety standards.&quot;  These were mandatory standards that dictated how a given process had to be operated.  I found that it was almost impossible to write standards so clearly that some doofus could not misinterpret them, unintentionally or not.  I once had a lengthy argument as to whether a pipe constituted &quot;equipment.&quot;  I eventually gave in, and added a sentence to the effect that &quot;For the purposes of this standard, piping shall be considered equipment.&quot;  So, I have some feel for the care that must be taken with legal documents.

But, I also drafted several patent applications, and worked with lawyers to get them finalized and filed.  That process ranged from okay, to infuriating.  The good ones would take what I had written, put it into legalese, and get it filed.  But we had one guy who thought he knew chemistry better than I did, and another one who could not seem to write a comprehensible sentence, complete with actual subject and verb agreement. He was supposed to be brilliant, but I wondered how he got through law school.  My opinion of legal writing is mixed, at best.

By the way, your writing is excellent.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In my profession as an engineer, I used to occasionally have to write something called &#8220;operational safety standards.&#8221;  These were mandatory standards that dictated how a given process had to be operated.  I found that it was almost impossible to write standards so clearly that some doofus could not misinterpret them, unintentionally or not.  I once had a lengthy argument as to whether a pipe constituted &#8220;equipment.&#8221;  I eventually gave in, and added a sentence to the effect that &#8220;For the purposes of this standard, piping shall be considered equipment.&#8221;  So, I have some feel for the care that must be taken with legal documents.</p>
<p>But, I also drafted several patent applications, and worked with lawyers to get them finalized and filed.  That process ranged from okay, to infuriating.  The good ones would take what I had written, put it into legalese, and get it filed.  But we had one guy who thought he knew chemistry better than I did, and another one who could not seem to write a comprehensible sentence, complete with actual subject and verb agreement. He was supposed to be brilliant, but I wondered how he got through law school.  My opinion of legal writing is mixed, at best.</p>
<p>By the way, your writing is excellent.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Chases Eagles		</title>
		<link>https://thenewneo.com/2026/04/15/law-clarityand-simplicity/#comment-2848250</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Chases Eagles]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Apr 2026 20:42:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://thenewneo.com/?p=148602#comment-2848250</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[How about….

“ A. D. Mills in his Dictionary of English Place-Names interprets the name as &quot;Ridge of the hill with a rocky peak&quot;, giving its etymology as Old English torr, Celtic *penn, and Old English hoh, each of which mean &#039;hill&#039;.[2] Thus, the name Torpenhow Hill could be interpreted as &#039;hill-hill-hill Hill&#039;.”

The “keep” part which means in your possession and the “bear” part means carried on your person.

Anyone unfit to keep and bear arms is unfit to be running around loose. They can’t be trusted with cars, axes and rat poison either.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How about….</p>
<p>“ A. D. Mills in his Dictionary of English Place-Names interprets the name as &#8220;Ridge of the hill with a rocky peak&#8221;, giving its etymology as Old English torr, Celtic *penn, and Old English hoh, each of which mean &#8216;hill&#8217;.[2] Thus, the name Torpenhow Hill could be interpreted as &#8216;hill-hill-hill Hill&#8217;.”</p>
<p>The “keep” part which means in your possession and the “bear” part means carried on your person.</p>
<p>Anyone unfit to keep and bear arms is unfit to be running around loose. They can’t be trusted with cars, axes and rat poison either.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Steve (Retired/recovering lawyer)		</title>
		<link>https://thenewneo.com/2026/04/15/law-clarityand-simplicity/#comment-2848246</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Steve (Retired/recovering lawyer)]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Apr 2026 19:22:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://thenewneo.com/?p=148602#comment-2848246</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Huxley and TomR together come very close to, if not actually landing on the issue about &quot;the law.&quot;  Defining things is the key.  If I am allowed to provide the definitions, I control the outcome.  &quot;Thou shalt not steal&quot; sounds clear until some pettifogger &quot;explains&quot; that, since property is merely a construct of white patriarchy, should another appropriate it without permission, it is not &quot;stealing&quot; but rather &quot;liberating&quot; said property from someone who had no right to it in the first place.  Marxism provides a perfect example, since it purports to eliminate entirely the concept of &quot;private property,&quot; so ipso facto, one can&#039;t &quot;steal&quot; another&#039;s property--unless one takes the property of &quot;the state.&quot;  The problem is exacerbated by those who intentionally misconstrue words in order to advance their particular cause,  whether political or personal.  Confucius got it right centuries ago when the spoke about the rectification of language and the ill effect on society in general resulting from the misuse of words to mean something other than what is intended.  The Bible speaks to this indirectly, as in Deuteronomy, where moving boundary markers is condemned as worthy of capital  punishment.  Although directly applicable to land boundaries, it applies by analogy to moving linguistic boundaries as well.  When the boundaries are moved, the foundation upon which everything rests is destroyed and the entire edifice falls.  Pretty sure that is where we are headed unless we pull up short by some miracle.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Huxley and TomR together come very close to, if not actually landing on the issue about &#8220;the law.&#8221;  Defining things is the key.  If I am allowed to provide the definitions, I control the outcome.  &#8220;Thou shalt not steal&#8221; sounds clear until some pettifogger &#8220;explains&#8221; that, since property is merely a construct of white patriarchy, should another appropriate it without permission, it is not &#8220;stealing&#8221; but rather &#8220;liberating&#8221; said property from someone who had no right to it in the first place.  Marxism provides a perfect example, since it purports to eliminate entirely the concept of &#8220;private property,&#8221; so ipso facto, one can&#8217;t &#8220;steal&#8221; another&#8217;s property&#8211;unless one takes the property of &#8220;the state.&#8221;  The problem is exacerbated by those who intentionally misconstrue words in order to advance their particular cause,  whether political or personal.  Confucius got it right centuries ago when the spoke about the rectification of language and the ill effect on society in general resulting from the misuse of words to mean something other than what is intended.  The Bible speaks to this indirectly, as in Deuteronomy, where moving boundary markers is condemned as worthy of capital  punishment.  Although directly applicable to land boundaries, it applies by analogy to moving linguistic boundaries as well.  When the boundaries are moved, the foundation upon which everything rests is destroyed and the entire edifice falls.  Pretty sure that is where we are headed unless we pull up short by some miracle.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: AesopFan		</title>
		<link>https://thenewneo.com/2026/04/15/law-clarityand-simplicity/#comment-2848244</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[AesopFan]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Apr 2026 19:17:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://thenewneo.com/?p=148602#comment-2848244</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[@ Richard Aubrey &#062; &quot;As regards the 2A, when you call up the militia, it would be useful if they were already armed. &lt;b&gt;Having to show up at the local armory first might be impractical,&lt;/b&gt; depending on who was doing what to whom and where.&quot;

Several stories from Israel during the Hamas attack on October 7, 2023, confirm your observation, IIRC.

IMO, This is also a rationale for Secretary Hegseth&#039;s recent order that soldiers be allowed to carry personal arms on base, if legal in the relevant state. I suppose there are some necessary limits on carrying government-issue firearms outside of the field of battle, but if the woke-infected hierarchies aren&#039;t cleaned out soon, we will continue to have domestic cases resembling battle fronts.

Especially if Iranian terrorists are among the illegals imported by Biden Inc (and that&#039;s a rhetorical &quot;if&quot;).]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@ Richard Aubrey &gt; &#8220;As regards the 2A, when you call up the militia, it would be useful if they were already armed. <b>Having to show up at the local armory first might be impractical,</b> depending on who was doing what to whom and where.&#8221;</p>
<p>Several stories from Israel during the Hamas attack on October 7, 2023, confirm your observation, IIRC.</p>
<p>IMO, This is also a rationale for Secretary Hegseth&#8217;s recent order that soldiers be allowed to carry personal arms on base, if legal in the relevant state. I suppose there are some necessary limits on carrying government-issue firearms outside of the field of battle, but if the woke-infected hierarchies aren&#8217;t cleaned out soon, we will continue to have domestic cases resembling battle fronts.</p>
<p>Especially if Iranian terrorists are among the illegals imported by Biden Inc (and that&#8217;s a rhetorical &#8220;if&#8221;).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Sennacherib		</title>
		<link>https://thenewneo.com/2026/04/15/law-clarityand-simplicity/#comment-2848226</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Sennacherib]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Apr 2026 16:44:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://thenewneo.com/?p=148602#comment-2848226</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Neo,
Appear!]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Neo,<br />
Appear!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Tom Grey		</title>
		<link>https://thenewneo.com/2026/04/15/law-clarityand-simplicity/#comment-2848196</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Tom Grey]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Apr 2026 11:52:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://thenewneo.com/?p=148602#comment-2848196</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Lots of laws include “woman” but there is at least one SC Justice unable, or unwilling, to define what a woman is.
Most 8 year olds can.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Lots of laws include “woman” but there is at least one SC Justice unable, or unwilling, to define what a woman is.<br />
Most 8 year olds can.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Richard Aubrey		</title>
		<link>https://thenewneo.com/2026/04/15/law-clarityand-simplicity/#comment-2848190</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Richard Aubrey]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Apr 2026 09:17:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://thenewneo.com/?p=148602#comment-2848190</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[niketas

That&#039;s hilarious.

Sometime back, a friend brought a Brit crime movie.  Not lords&#038;detectives,  A murder happened in an English country village (apparently one of the most deadly places on Earth) and the side plots began.  Fortunately, we were interrupted after about twenty minutes.  I&#039;m not gong back to that without closed captions and a glossary.  And this was normal people speaking normal--for them--English in a normal little town in the current era.

Sometime back, some bodies were found at the site of the Battle of Camden.  About a dozen, one a Brit.  A detachment from the latter&#039;s regiment was on hand for the ceremonial interment.  Interviewed one of them.  Absolutely unintelligible.

As regards the 2A, when you call up the militia, it would be useful if they were already armed.  Having to show up at the local armory first might be impractical, depending on who was doing what to whom and where.

As to &quot;well-regulated&quot;, couple of points.  One of Biden&#039;s DoD types said she didn&#039;t want to recruit from &quot;old military families&quot;, since she didn&#039;t want a &quot;military caste&quot;.  A bunch of guys who can organize with a glance and a nod might be dangerous to whatever was supposed to follow Biden and Obama.
But any number of former military, however recruited and spread out would be the same.
And see the self-organizing after natural disasters;  youtube carries a lot of it.  &quot;Harvey rescue&quot;, is one although some footage may have been taken down.  &quot;Helene relief&quot; or &quot;rescue&quot; ditto.

This may not be related, but it&#039;s too good not to relate,  Back about six years, I was reading, lord help me, the WaPo&#039;s fashion column on the iconic picture of the three American guys getting the Big Deal French award after saving a couple of hundred lives on the Thalys train.  Went over it with my granddaughter, who was twelve at the time.  At the end, the author (Robin Givhan, I think) remarked that the guys had been dressed appropriately; Polos and Dockers are what young guys wear when they know they&#039;re supposed to get dressed up but they don&#039;t know what the fuss is.
Granddaughter shrugged;  &quot;We&#039;re Americans.  It&#039;s what we do.&quot;

And look at the old, say two hundred or more years back, militia laws.  Any mention of hierarchy, formal drills....   Nope.  Age fourteen to forty-three, show up with a blanket, three day&#039;s rations and your rifle.  That was Michigan, ca 1820.
So looking for legal precedent for &quot;regulated&quot; might be tricky.

The 93d Detachment of the General Militia reported for duty on 9-11 and took care of business.  And most of them had never met.  But, as my granddaughter said.....]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>niketas</p>
<p>That&#8217;s hilarious.</p>
<p>Sometime back, a friend brought a Brit crime movie.  Not lords&amp;detectives,  A murder happened in an English country village (apparently one of the most deadly places on Earth) and the side plots began.  Fortunately, we were interrupted after about twenty minutes.  I&#8217;m not gong back to that without closed captions and a glossary.  And this was normal people speaking normal&#8211;for them&#8211;English in a normal little town in the current era.</p>
<p>Sometime back, some bodies were found at the site of the Battle of Camden.  About a dozen, one a Brit.  A detachment from the latter&#8217;s regiment was on hand for the ceremonial interment.  Interviewed one of them.  Absolutely unintelligible.</p>
<p>As regards the 2A, when you call up the militia, it would be useful if they were already armed.  Having to show up at the local armory first might be impractical, depending on who was doing what to whom and where.</p>
<p>As to &#8220;well-regulated&#8221;, couple of points.  One of Biden&#8217;s DoD types said she didn&#8217;t want to recruit from &#8220;old military families&#8221;, since she didn&#8217;t want a &#8220;military caste&#8221;.  A bunch of guys who can organize with a glance and a nod might be dangerous to whatever was supposed to follow Biden and Obama.<br />
But any number of former military, however recruited and spread out would be the same.<br />
And see the self-organizing after natural disasters;  youtube carries a lot of it.  &#8220;Harvey rescue&#8221;, is one although some footage may have been taken down.  &#8220;Helene relief&#8221; or &#8220;rescue&#8221; ditto.</p>
<p>This may not be related, but it&#8217;s too good not to relate,  Back about six years, I was reading, lord help me, the WaPo&#8217;s fashion column on the iconic picture of the three American guys getting the Big Deal French award after saving a couple of hundred lives on the Thalys train.  Went over it with my granddaughter, who was twelve at the time.  At the end, the author (Robin Givhan, I think) remarked that the guys had been dressed appropriately; Polos and Dockers are what young guys wear when they know they&#8217;re supposed to get dressed up but they don&#8217;t know what the fuss is.<br />
Granddaughter shrugged;  &#8220;We&#8217;re Americans.  It&#8217;s what we do.&#8221;</p>
<p>And look at the old, say two hundred or more years back, militia laws.  Any mention of hierarchy, formal drills&#8230;.   Nope.  Age fourteen to forty-three, show up with a blanket, three day&#8217;s rations and your rifle.  That was Michigan, ca 1820.<br />
So looking for legal precedent for &#8220;regulated&#8221; might be tricky.</p>
<p>The 93d Detachment of the General Militia reported for duty on 9-11 and took care of business.  And most of them had never met.  But, as my granddaughter said&#8230;..</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: neo		</title>
		<link>https://thenewneo.com/2026/04/15/law-clarityand-simplicity/#comment-2848188</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[neo]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Apr 2026 04:17:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://thenewneo.com/?p=148602#comment-2848188</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Sennacherib:

That&#039;s a mighty big &quot;if.&quot; The point is that the two statements appear linked.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sennacherib:</p>
<p>That&#8217;s a mighty big &#8220;if.&#8221; The point is that the two statements appear linked.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Sennacherib		</title>
		<link>https://thenewneo.com/2026/04/15/law-clarityand-simplicity/#comment-2848179</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Sennacherib]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Apr 2026 03:54:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://thenewneo.com/?p=148602#comment-2848179</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Neo,
It&#039;s not confusing if it&#039;s considered two statements. 1) a regulated militia 2) the right of the people to keep and bear arms.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Neo,<br />
It&#8217;s not confusing if it&#8217;s considered two statements. 1) a regulated militia 2) the right of the people to keep and bear arms.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
