Comments on: The mind boggles http://gunnuts.net/2008/01/12/the-mind-boggles/ Gun info by shooters, for shooters Thu, 17 May 2012 03:18:03 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Hyunchback http://gunnuts.net/2008/01/12/the-mind-boggles/#comment-2102 Hyunchback Mon, 14 Jan 2008 01:30:24 +0000 http://www.nrahab.com/?p=945#comment-2102 I wish I could say I expected better treatment, but I won't lie. The acorn doesn't land far from the oak. What I really wish the SCOTUS would do with Heller is to obey precedent and make this the "Roe V. Wade" ruling of the 2nd Amendment. Roe established a right not explicit in the Constitution. What we have here is a portion of the Constitution which IS spelled out and being lied or ignored. I want my Constitution to be obeyed all across my nation. If we have no Constitution then we have no nation. If we have a nation then I have a Constitution which recognizes my right to fight for that nation. If we have no nation then I really need my guns to establish one. I wish I could say I expected better treatment, but I won’t lie.

The acorn doesn’t land far from the oak.

What I really wish the SCOTUS would do with Heller is to obey precedent and make this the “Roe V. Wade” ruling of the 2nd Amendment.

Roe established a right not explicit in the Constitution. What we have here is a portion of the Constitution which IS spelled out and being lied or ignored.

I want my Constitution to be obeyed all across my nation. If we have no Constitution then we have no nation.

If we have a nation then I have a Constitution which recognizes my right to fight for that nation. If we have no nation then I really need my guns to establish one.

]]> By: Alan Gunn http://gunnuts.net/2008/01/12/the-mind-boggles/#comment-2101 Alan Gunn Sun, 13 Jan 2008 13:42:45 +0000 http://www.nrahab.com/?p=945#comment-2101 In the end, people who spend their lives in government are on the government's side. The idea that the Republicans are the good guys is a delusion--at their best, they're the slightly less bad guys. In the end, people who spend their lives in government are on the government’s side. The idea that the Republicans are the good guys is a delusion–at their best, they’re the slightly less bad guys.

]]> By: Hypnagogue http://gunnuts.net/2008/01/12/the-mind-boggles/#comment-2100 Hypnagogue Sun, 13 Jan 2008 03:32:07 +0000 http://www.nrahab.com/?p=945#comment-2100 I don't think this amicus is quite the betrayal you are making it out to be. Basically, the DOJ is proposing a slow-roll finding: 1) 2A is an individual right, but 2) it's a right that should be subject to reasonable restrictions, and 3) you should remand to the court of first instance to apply that finding and establish a standard of review. The practical meaning of this is: "We sense that you are going to find for an individual right, but please don't establish the standard of review at the SCOTUS level which could upset the applecart all at once. Instead, let every Circuit find their own standard of review, and eventually a consensus view will emerge that the SCOTUS can affirm, 70 or 80 years from now." The practical upshot of this is that the state and federal firearms laws would not be immediately nullified, and instead would be slowly pared back by individual Circuits. I think the average gun-owner in this country wants the SCOTUS to establish the standard outright, and establish settled caselaw without remanding. But let's be reasonable; how likely is that, exactly? I don’t think this amicus is quite the betrayal you are making it out to be. Basically, the DOJ is proposing a slow-roll finding: 1) 2A is an individual right, but 2) it’s a right that should be subject to reasonable restrictions, and 3) you should remand to the court of first instance to apply that finding and establish a standard of review.

The practical meaning of this is: “We sense that you are going to find for an individual right, but please don’t establish the standard of review at the SCOTUS level which could upset the applecart all at once. Instead, let every Circuit find their own standard of review, and eventually a consensus view will emerge that the SCOTUS can affirm, 70 or 80 years from now.”

The practical upshot of this is that the state and federal firearms laws would not be immediately nullified, and instead would be slowly pared back by individual Circuits. I think the average gun-owner in this country wants the SCOTUS to establish the standard outright, and establish settled caselaw without remanding. But let’s be reasonable; how likely is that, exactly?

]]>