Secret Weapon : Some 2nd Amendment lawyers help the gun-ban side (Part 1)

National Review ^ | 9-22-03 | Dave Kopel

[Dan from Michigan]

Boom

[Lurker]

The NRA is worse than useless, they are complicit.

And this article is garbage from start to finish.

A more detailed dissection will follow shortly.

Thanks for posting it though Dan.

Regards,

L

[PLMerite]

I wonder what would happen if some organization with 3 or 4 million *armed* members threatened a "long, hot summer" if they didn't get their way...

That's the NRA I keep waiting for.

[tpaine]

I concure bump. Back soon.

[Lurker]

Don't hold your breath.

The NRA has supported every single piece of gun control legislation that's come down the pike since 1968.

Upchuck Heston himself thought that the GCA of 1968 was a fine idea.

"From My Cold Dead Hands" my ass.....

The NRA is run by a bunch of cowards who do nothing but stick their fingers in the wind.

They suck up millions of dollars in 'donations' and then deliberately sideline their 'ILA'. They're a bunch of gutless, brainless, balless, and dickless Guchi Gulch wonders.

Hell, Wayne LaPierre (French ancestry, there's a shock) himself has said that 'assault rifles' are a legitimate area for FedGov regulation.

Calling that guy a pansy is an insult to pansies all over the world.

F*** the NRA.

L

[tpaine]

This Kopel clown writes in vast detail on how the local yokel is at fault, but skips over what the NRA was doing to fight the feds on the matter:

"Federal courts often show such deference to state courts on matters of state law. The antigun federal district judge, however, apparently recognized a golden opportunity.
He proceeded expeditiously with the case of Quilici v. Morton Grove. Soon, he issued a ruling holding that the Illinois constitution right to arms did not forbid banning handguns, and that the federal Second Amendment did not prevent any type of gun ban."

I searched in vain to see what our heros at the NRA did to appeal this outrageous 'ruling'. I suspect it was a big fat nothing..

[agitator]

I came to pretty much the same conclusion over 10 years ago. It appears to me that there's a symbiotic relationship between the NRA and the likes of Chuckie.

The candy-asses that think that the gun control debate is a debate and that we should all be polite about it are full of it. Gun owners are in a street fight without their guns. You don't fight a street fight with Roberts Rules of Order, you break off a bottle and grind it into your opponents face, then pick up a garbage can and bash it over their heads. To quote the Army, "continue to kick and stomp until victim is subdued."

There is too much at stake to consider the fight over gun control an armchair debate. I suggest siccing a few good P.I.'s on a few well placed politicians and catching them on video coming out of the NoTell Motel. Then suggest that they might become stars in their districts on the Cable Access channel and the internet if they don't reconsider their position on the subject - just for starters.

And as far as I'm concerned, anybody that thinks gun owners should be above that type of behavior would do well to remember that it doesn't matter how you win a streetfight, the only thing that matters is who's still standing at the end of it.

Gun owners didn't start this fight but we damned well ought to quit relying on professional losers and finish it.

[Drammach]

Bump for Dissection

[William Tell]

I don't buy the crappy logic that a state court, if approached first, would find in favor of gun owners.

Silveira vs. Lockyer was not found in favor of gun owners by Kalifornia courts. Instead, we are told that there is no individual right to keep and bear arms.

The law as it stands today is that Kalifornia could outlaw all firearms, if only they dare.

[RogueIsland]

I wonder what would happen if some organization with 3 or 4 million *armed* members threatened a "long, hot summer" if they didn't get their way...

You would see anti-gun legislation the likes of would make your head spin, and the public would back it 100%. The full weight of the Patriot Act would be brought to bear on the "domestic terrorists", and private gun ownership in this country would go the way of England.

[Maelstrom]

Your response is my reason to follow this thread.

The NRA lost my membership when they supported all-gun licensing for an arduous and complicated concealed carry law in PA. The registration included no penalties for government officials who violated the non-compilation of data clause. Philadelphia promptly put everyone's name on a list and they keep it close to this day.

ACT 17

[Copernicus]

I wonder what would happen if some organization with 3 or 4 million *armed* members threatened a "long, hot summer" if they didn't get their way...

I think that already happened once not too long ago. It has been dubbed "The Civil War". It was, of course, completely uncivil and in many aspects the Constitution was on the defeated side.

Best regards,

[Copernicus]

There is too much at stake to consider the fight over gun control an armchair debate. I suggest siccing a few good P.I.'s on a few well placed politicians and catching them on video coming out of the NoTell Motel. Then suggest that they might become stars in their districts on the Cable Access channel and the internet if they don't reconsider their position on the subject - just for starters.

I like this idea. From whence cometh the funding?

Best regards,

[UncleDudley]

in many aspects the Constitution was on the defeated side.

Absolutely correct. And what we have in the USSA now is a continuation of the War of Northern (big government) Aggression.

[dd5339]

Ping

[Shooter 2.5]

The lawsuit was lost even before it started and there was nothing the NRA or the other gun groups could do about it.

The Illinois Second Amendment which is convienently out of this article says "Subject to the Police Power, the Right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed".

The legislators decided they were the police power and the Illinois Supreme Court agreed with them.

When we sued in Oak Park, we had to use another amendment to argue our case. We lost again. That's one of the reasons Illinois has continued to have more and more gun control. The courts can't and won't stop it.

The Oak Park fight took two years out of my life and I moved out of Illinois because of it. It's also why I'm a Endowment Member of the NRA.

[Dan from Michigan]

Part I

[MileHi]

That's the NRA I keep waiting for.

I cannot imagine a senario in which the NRA would advocate actually using the second amendment to repel tyranny.

[PLMerite]

"You would see anti-gun legislation the likes of would make your head spin, and the public would back it 100%. The full weight of the Patriot Act would be brought to bear on the "domestic terrorists", and private gun ownership in this country would go the way of England."

Not if they actually *delivered* on the threat.