[MikeJ]

We waited forty years for a court like this?

I agree. I think Dave Kopel is correct when he says that this is a flawed case that is likely to hurt us.

For goodness sake... lets wait until we have a favorable court, and then lets put together a clean, strong case, and lets go into the fight expecting to win it. We have an awful lot at stake here. If we lose, we will have a long time to regret it.

[Redcloak]

For goodness sake... lets wait until we have a favorable court, and then lets put together a clean, strong case, and lets go into the fight expecting to win it.

Sun-tzu taught that a successful general only fights battles he's already won. Unfortunately, Silveira's attorneys have never heard of Sun-tzu.

[KeepAndBearArms]

MikeJ"  "I agree. I think Dave Kopel is correct when he says that this is a flawed case that is likely to hurt us."

Dave Kopel's ignorant rant was debunked eight ways from Sunday. Get with the program:

KOPEL CLUELESS:
Silveira Lawsuit Attacker is Shooting Blanks

[Ancesthntr]

For goodness sake... lets wait until we have a favorable court, and then lets put together a clean, strong case, and lets go into the fight expecting to win it. We have an awful lot at stake here. If we lose, we will have a long time to regret it.

I agree with your sentiments, BUT the time to debate this issue is long past. The case is before the SC - right NOW - and talking about what we should have done to bring a favorable case before a favorable court is TOTALLY IRRELEVANT.

With respect, both you and Shooter 2.5 need to realize that it is 11/6/2003, not 2 or 3 or 4 years ago when a debate like this would have meant something. The die is cast...decide where you stand based on CURRENT facts, not some theoretical exercise about an ideal case.