Well, I didn't want to leave anyone with the idea that people who are arrested don't have standing; nor did I want anyone to think that standing is the only way to obtain standing. The test for standing is quite well established in law.
Thanks Va. I appreciate the info even if I took a different spin on it after reading it. Do you know of any case law that I could look into to see if anyone has mustered a successful challenge with a Standing as you described it? Just a link to point me in the right direction would be helpful, I really don't want you to feel that I have you doing my leg work for me. I just don't know where to start looking. Gimme a push...;-)
Well, interestingly enough, there is a case involving gun rights. Its on out of California. I provide you this link at the risk of you using this case to undercut my arguement. It doesn't, however it wouldn't be fair if I didn't point you to it and see what you think (by the way, I completely disagree with this case, but the TEST for standing is correctly stated (but not correctly applied)).
HICKMAN v BLOCK (Scroll down to part II for the standing discussion)
Still, I don't think this guy in Colorado had even that much of a reason for his injunctive relief request. He was just a guy who wanted to carry a gun and was tired of the GodGov telling him he couldn't. That directly set against our 2A.
His methodology may be unorthodox, but I won't quibble if it produces the desired result.