Search results for query: *

'Scuse me, but last time I checked, that law, (The NFA) was still on the books, and being enforced. It might be that the Heller court would strike down an abusive tax on ammo, but the Heller ruling itself in no way establishes that.

And already covered by his other work. The new work for gun transfers carries vanishingly small marginal costs, on top of the costs he has already incurred for his corporate customers. No, it's fair enough for him to amortize those expenses across all his customers, no reason the private...

Must be one; They didn't ALL vote for the '94 'assault weapon' ban.

In one sense, yes, in another, no. I'd say the NRA was right that the case was a very big risk. The point where they were wrong, IMO, was that the Supreme court was eventually going to take a 2nd amendment test case, if not one crafted by our side, then one crafted by the other side. If not...

The problem with family law has never been the $150-200/hr. It's always been the hour the family lawyer claims to take for each page of boilerplate he or she photocopies. Mechanics might make comparable sums including materials, but their billing practices are hugely more honest, due to...

In order to grow their majority, they had to rely on a lot of relatively conservative Democrats winning in conservative districts. I'm sure they found that distasteful... But it does mean those Dems need to maintain at least some of their conservative creds, even as they're voting for...

I think the nation's gun ban jurisdictions are desperate to persuade as many of their victims to disarm as possible before the courts force them to admit those guns are legal to own. That's why we're seeing so many gun "buybacks".

As long as you are obeying the law they may eventually get in trouble for doing a darn thing about it. (Though I wouldn't bet on it!) But I assure you that they darned well CAN "do a darn thing about it", as in charging you with "brandishing". You might be acquitted in the end, but it's still...

I'd frankly be surprised if 'justices' who didn't want the right to be enforcible against ANY level of government would have, as their fall back position, that it should be enforcible against ALL levels of government. Rather than taking the position that, if the federal government can't violate...

The obvious question is, was Heller's handgun semi-automatic? Because they didn't order the district to let Heller register just any gun, they ordered the district to let Heller register "his handguns", and that means whatever type of handgun it is, they HAVE to permit it.

I really have no problem with the notion that they're not obligated to agree with the Supreme court when it's wrong: Isn't that the position they take, quite correctly, when it comes to the Supreme court's approval of campaign censorship legislation? The problem here is that they're wrong...

To be fair to Reagan, at that point he was verging on vegetable status, due to the Alzheimer's.

I have to think they could solve that one without an electronic system. Like maybe by accepting that "Y" and "Yes" mean the same thing?

LOL! There ain't no such thing as a ruling decisive enough to accomplish THAT, when he'll be nominating 'Justices' who simply don't care what the Constitution or precedent says. Obama gets 4 'Justices', with a Democratic Senate to confirm them, and it's game over as far as the Court is concerned.

I think we're better off if it's a 5-4, or at most 6-3 decision. Only way they're going to reach 7-2 or better is to give up too much ground to the anti-gunners on the Court, make it a decision that rules out D.C.'s insanely harsh gun control, but allows anything short of it. We don't want to...

Considering some of the things Scalia has written, while I'm sure that all things being equal he'd prefer to uphold the 2nd amendment, there's at least an outside chance he'd decide upholding it would upset too many applecarts. The guy is not a strict constructionist by any stretch, as Raich...

Don't forget the offshore pirate TV stations they promised us, if McCain/Feingold were upheld. I'm assuming I don't see those broadcasts because I'm too far inland... ;)

Yes, and in 1934. a law was passed by Congress that put a 1000% tax on certain firearms, with the intent of keeping them out of the hands of everybody but the wealthy, and within a few years SCOTUS upheld it as constitutional. I wouldn't put much reliance on a precedent that's been overturned...

It's just a guesstimate based on how long they usually take to decide controversial cases, it's not based on any kind of leak.

I don't think I've ever heard of anybody being shot in the arm, and not noticing, either. Unless maybe the teens were already drunk themselves, in which case bad judgment and stupid decisions would be par for the course. Maybe it's the only way to get close enough to the front door to knock?