Search results for query: *

LOL! Well played, sir.

Bingo. That is why getting an individual rights interpretation from SCOTUS is well worth every apparent "concession" Gura made. It lays the foundation that is so absolutely essential for long-term success for our side.

Not even close. Since I wasn't arguing against your point, I guess you're welcome.

Ahhh...but if SCOTUS rules the 2A guarantees an individual right to keep and bear arms, and that "arms" includes handguns, there may well be grounds for a challenge to such policies as unreasonable restrictions.

Quite true. And not at all a position I was contesting. Then again, how many of us wouldn't have at least one RPG in the safe if we could ;)

Very doubtful. It is defensible (even if we don't like it) to declare registration a "reasonable restriction". But it is not defensible to implement registration in a way that unreasonably prevents the vast majority of people from being able to comply. Charging "thousands of dollars" for...

Oddly enough, all of those restrictions apply to concealed carry in TX (well, except for the "all plastic gun" ban), and yet I'm not at all prevented from acquiring a CHL and both owning and carrying a handgun. Somehow that doesn't strike me as what the Bradys are going for.

OK. Then provide the statistics requested according to whatever standard of "stopping power" you think is meaningful. Why? The vast majority of cops have never shot anyone. What do you think makes them experts on the subject? The majority of veterans have never shot anyone with a handgun...

Getting SCOTUS finally recognize it and establish the precedent is.

I don't know why some people go so far out of their way to ignore what has been plainly stated in order to read into someone's comments things they have not said. Here's what I said: Machine guns have never been common firearms in terms of private ownership. This was true before federal...

I'm not sure I follow. Anyone who has filed a case in the 9th is not going to be able to file in the D.C Circuit. They may have been urged by a lot of people, but in the end they had plenty of incentive to file anyway.

Please provide us with the comparative statistics form these wars regarding the relative one-shot-stop capabilities of the calibers in question. Actually, all of the studies with which I'm familiar, using modern loads, indicate very little difference between the two. Do you have anything to...

In full-auto?

64K? You had 64K?! Luxury!!!

IIRC, rulings by the D.C. Circuit are no more/less binding with regard to federal law than those of any other circuit court. The appeal to SCOTUS came from the city of D.C., which had standing, not from "the anti-gunners" in general, who did not. I'm pretty sure that's false. But I'll let...

No. Well, some of them had little choice (assuming the decision to grant cert was not 7-0). But as a whole, of course they had a choice. I said that one of their jobs (meaning one of the court's functions) is to do what I said. That doesn't mean that they're forced to perform that function...

Because the decision by the DC Circuit represented a split from other circuit courts' interpretation of 2A, and one of SCOTUS' jobs is to resolve such conflicting interpretations of constitutional law. Furthermore, whatever SCOTUS rules in Heller will be binding on all other U.S. courts...

Based on...?

Again, "not the only ones" and "may others" do NOT equate to "common". Nonsense. There are a great many things that are banned that were never "common" in any sense of the word. What? Depending on who you ask, something like 60 million Americans own at least one non-MG firearm. That's...

You seem to have gone off on something of a tangent here, and lost sight of what is being discussed. Scalia said that MGs are not "common"ly owned by citizens, not that they aren't common in military use (he's not an idiot.) And your description of MGs being "too common"ly used by notorious...