Skip to comments.
SUPREME COURT NOTEBOOK: Women, Jewish, Physician and Gay Groups Unite in Gun Case
Associated Press ^
| Aug 14, 2003
| Gina Holland
Posted on 08/14/2003 1:05:58 PM PDT by mdittmar
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-22 next last
Now this would make for an interesting looking group of protestors.
1
posted on
08/14/2003 1:05:58 PM PDT
by
mdittmar
To: mdittmar
Politics makes for strange bedfellows.
To: TexasRepublic
Literally.... "Pink Pistols"
3
posted on
08/14/2003 1:10:46 PM PDT
by
adam_az
To: mdittmar
These people should just be happy they can own any! We can't have people suing to reclaim their rights when there is a possibility they might lose! They should just be happy with what they have!
4
posted on
08/14/2003 1:11:39 PM PDT
by
toothless
(the above post is sarcasm)
To: adam_az; TexasRepublic; mdittmar; toothless
Literally.... "Pink Pistols" I think I might be worried about their target recognition.
5
posted on
08/14/2003 1:17:01 PM PDT
by
Paleo Conservative
(Do not remove this tag under penalty of law.)
To: toothless
We can't have people suing to reclaim their rights when there is a possibility they might lose! If they lose some members of the SC need to be impeached for not being able to read plain English.
6
posted on
08/14/2003 1:21:30 PM PDT
by
chainsaw
To: mdittmar
I can think of only two votes on the Supreme Court that are a sure thing in favor of an individual RKBA: 1) Scalia, 2) Thomas
Rehnquist is almost a sure thing, perhaps I'm being too paranoid, but for some reason I don't see him as a certainty.
You can forget about Ginsburg, Stevens, Breyer, and Souter - they're sure things against an individual RKBA.
That leaves O'Connor and Kennedy. I'd say Kennedy leans to and O'Connor against.
I don't like our chances if a case goes all the way to the Supreme Court.
To: freedomcrusader
I don't like our chances if a case goes all the way to the Supreme Court.
I don't like what happens if the court rules against us. This will not be a pretty thing. Might coincide with Hitlary as prez. That would be THE test of the Union. I won't say more.
8
posted on
08/14/2003 1:30:13 PM PDT
by
GatekeeperBookman
("impossible and radically idealist notions" * please inquire for clarification.)
To: GatekeeperBookman
"From my cold dead hands."
9
posted on
08/14/2003 1:41:29 PM PDT
by
mdittmar
To: mdittmar
defended its ban of 75 high-powered weapons with rapid-fire capabilities. But they allowed numerous other rifles with the same rate-of-fire capabilities. I immediately went out and bought a couple when they passed the law. The difference? A pistol grip.
A rifle is evil if it has a pistol grip. But a rifle with a conventional stock is harmless.
Idiot politicians.
To: hoosierskypilot
Idiot politiciansRedundant
3. linguistics repeating meaning: with the same meaning as a word used elsewhere in a passage and without a rhetorical purpose;)
11
posted on
08/14/2003 2:21:49 PM PDT
by
mdittmar
To: mdittmar
From Ninth Circuit Judge Alex Kozinski's dissent from the Circuit's order denying an 11-judge rehearing of the 3-judge panel's decision in this case:
All too many of the ... great tragedies of history -- Stalin's atrocities, the killing fields of Cambodia, the Holocaust, to name but a few -- were perpetrated by armed troops against unarmed populations. Many could well have been avoided or mitigated, had the perpetrators known their intended victims were equipped with a rifle and twenty bullets apiece, as the Militia Act required here. [Citation.] If a few hundred Jewish fighters in the Warsaw Ghetto could hold off the Wehrmacht for almost a month with only a handful of weapons, six million Jews armed with rifles could not so easily have been herded into cattle cars.
My excellent colleagues have forgotten these bitter lessons of history. The prospect of tyranny may not grab the headlines the way vivid stories of gun crime routinely do. But few saw the Third Reich coming until it was too late. The Second Amendment is a doomsday provision, one designed for those exceptionally rare circumstances where all other rights have failed--where the government refuses to stand for reelection and silences those who protest; where courts have lost the courage to oppose, or can find no one to enforce their decrees. However improbable these contingencies may seem today, facing them unprepared is a mistake a free people get to make only once.
Silveira v. Lockyer, 328 F.3d 567, 569 (9th Cir. 2003) (Kozinski, Circuit J., dissenting from order denying rehearing en banc).
12
posted on
08/14/2003 2:56:18 PM PDT
by
pogo101
To: mdittmar
It's so sad that this is true, but in today's society, the gay group will help make the gunowners appear more mainstream, less "extremist".
13
posted on
08/14/2003 3:01:56 PM PDT
by
stands2reason
( CATHOLIC Freepers: Have you ever read "A Canticle for Leibowitz"?)
To: pogo101
However improbable these contingencies may seem today, facing them unprepared is a mistake a free people get to make only once.Stay safe,stay armed.
14
posted on
08/14/2003 3:10:22 PM PDT
by
mdittmar
To: freedomcrusader
I see it this way:
Certain For: Rehnquist, Thomas, Scalia
Certain Against: Ginsburg, Breyer, Souter
Swing Votes: O'Connor, Kennedy, Stevens
Stevens is all over the page on his decisions on any number of issues. I think he must flip a coin when he wakes up in the morning.
To: adam_az
It probably wasn't a pistol in his pocket. He was just glad to see him!
To: mdittmar
bttt
17
posted on
08/14/2003 6:13:59 PM PDT
by
ellery
To: ought-six
We must keep in mind that by the time this is actually heard by the Supeme Court, there may be a couple of new judges on the bench, and a couple of the present ones gone.
There's no way to predict what will happen between now and when the case is heard. This would be true just about anytime a suit is filed. It takes a while to wend it's way to the top of the docket--and anything can happen to people which could change the make-up of the court.
18
posted on
08/14/2003 7:11:31 PM PDT
by
basil
To: mdittmar
Idiot politicians Don't I wish! If they're idiots, how come they're running things and we're not?
To: findingtruth
if they were 'smart politicians' we'd be more screwed than we already are.
koz.
20
posted on
08/14/2003 8:49:22 PM PDT
by
KOZ.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-22 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson