Recent content by rlb

I got a lesson in gun safety the other day. I was over at my buddy's house and his wife asked to see my pistol (she knows I carry one). I said, hey, sure. I dropped the mag and handed it to her. Before I could react, she pointed it right at her husband and pulled the trigger-- CLICK. Heh. Crazy...

Anybody notice that the context of "rights" in (almost?) every one of those quotes are "rights" vis-a-vis another part of the government?

Compare that with Giuliani's recent speech- "the Constitution grants," "I would grant women the right..." etc.

If anything I would say that Thomas is the only sure bet for our side. Scalia, maybe-- but he has proven time and time again that he'll defer to "good" precedent, especially if it gives a clear answer to a potentially difficult question. And what could be a more clear-cut rule than "There is no...

Because that case was decided in a time when the Supreme Court acted as a check on the expansion of government power, unlike today's Court, which gives Congress a blank check to do anything it wants, but strikes down centuries-old laws which the Court sees as interfering with peoples' ability to...

Sam Adams: thanks for the link. Reading the US brief, it does seem to argue that the right to keep and bear arms is "collective," but it only actually supports that argument with references saying that the right to bear arms is collective. This distinction might be a great place for...

Would you happen to have a citation for these arguments? I'd like to read them.

I assume you're referring to Miller-- but the "collective rights" bull doesn't come directly from Miller, it comes from circuit courts (deliberately) misreading Miller, starting in the '60s, IIRC. If you actually read Miller you'll see what I mean.

On the NYTIMES peice... http://armsandthelaw.com/archives/2007/05/don_kates_on_th.php Click the link above to read the rest.

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/celebrity/la-et-cause4may04,1,2006703.story?track=crosspromo&coll=la-headlines-entnews&ctrack=2&cset=true Will Fred Thompson's racist role have political repercussions?

Go talk to a lawyer, now. Family law isn't my thing, but I can say with reasonable certainty that the judge is not going to look kindly on a fraudulent conveyance of marital property in anticipation of divorce. If you really want to keep something with highly sentimental value, I guess...

I meant that it would have almost no effect as it relates to the establishment clause. Obviously the other parts would.

I would refuse delivery; but if it's already been accepted, I would take it direclty to the FFL and fill out the paperwork. Right now.

Assuming that the 1st amendment is incorporated against the States... what's the result? The right protected by the establishment clause is the right not to be forced to financially support an official church of the United States. Presumably we can substitute "state legislature" for...

Wow, that's... different. Who exactly did you ask? The correct reading, FYI, is that you can go in the casino, as long as you don't go to the bar, because that portion of the establishment is "primarily devoted to dispensing alcoholic beverages." It doesn't mean you can't drink while you're...