[Joe Brower]

Interesting. Ultimately, though, we are forced to ask the question, "What good does this do us?". Hopefully, this bodes well for cases like Silveira vs. Lockyer, which, if granted cert, would determine if the RKBA as defined in the 2A is indeed an "individual right".

[ExSoldier]

"....Ultimately, though, we are forced to ask the question, "What good does this do us?"

The very FIRST thing I learned in Law School...AFTER: "You teach yourself the LAW, we teach you how to think like a LAWYER"...was something about how the US Supreme Court is the only institution on the planet which visibly demonstrates that change is bad. Showing these cases in a brief to the court is going to be a persuasive element as a reminder of earlier binding precedent. I begin to be cheered just a wee bit more...at least the outlook isn't quite as gloomy as before.

[King Prout]

for us Average Joes, it will provide ammunition for the ongoing grassroots debate. That's a good thing.

[PhilDragoo]

Found it yesterday.

[Blue Collar Christian]

I believe that when "ultimately" comes, it will still be up to a split decision of the robes with agendas pinned to them. They will just need enough time to figure out how to explain themselves in legalese about their decisions, whether we like the outcome or not, in order to avoid the glare of their respective supporters.

"Ultimately" we need conservative judges in there ASAP!