There's so much going on with this case now, it's almost a "quagmire", but enough things are going right that I too hope it goes "all the way".
Jeez, where do we start?
* The 9th Circuit is now "internally split" on exactly HOW our rights are to be stripped! In the previous cases of Fresno Rifle (1989 I think?), Hickman (1995) and California AG Lockyer's position paper on the RKBA, they all took the position that regardless of what the 2nd Amendment is, it cannot limit state powers due to lack of incorporation. In Reinhard's
Silveira ruling, he torpedoed that by noting that Presser vs. Illinois (1886) and Cruickshank (1875) are "outdated" and no longer to be relied on as authority for the 2nd not applying to the states.
Someone mentioned that about Presser earlier in this thread. Presser really relies on Cruikshank as it's foundation, and it's Cruikshank that's vulnerable. It was basically a wildly pro-KKK decision by the USSC, and will last all of about 5 seconds once the USSC sees somebody stupid enough to rely on it (like Lockyer, or HCI, or VPC, or LCAV and other such morons).
* I assume the fact that Silveira disagrees with previous 9th Circuit opinions is why Gary Gorski and co decided to try En Banc. I consider En Banc worth trying because A), we might even win (granted, not likely in the 9th!) and B), it gives Dubya a chance to fill retiree vacancies at the USSC. Despite the dissapointments of the Dubya administration post-9/11, his track record on picking judges is good and the people he's been considering lately as front-runners have been uniformly excellent.
* The NRA are nervous about Silveira for a number of reasons. It's a really sucky circuit, it's about highly politicized "assault rifles" that the media has made the general public nervous on, Gorski made minor mistakes in his brief (such as leading off with a Hitler quote that is a known "urban legend") and then to top it off, Gary got dragged into a giant public pissing with Chuck Michel, which has helped nobody.
Most of what's here:
http://keepandbeararms.com/Silveira/scotus.asp
...is pretty good. But sadly, it now also contains an outright lie written by Brian Puckett:
--------------------
The reasons for this are many. They include the effect of anti-gun propaganda generated by the government and communications media, and the failure of increasingly socialized, urbanized, history-illiterate citizens to understand the importance of an armed citizenry in maintaining freedom. Also included is the fact that the largest gun-rights organization, the NRA, has no courts-related strategy for regaining our lost rights, or even maintaining the status quo. Their plan, and the plan of the gun community in general, is the tactical non-plan of simply reacting to the assaults of the anti-gun forces.
--------------------
It's been revealed as a lie when the NRA backed the lawsuit against the DC general gun ban by Cato institute legal scholars. The NRA wants to fight in DC because:
* Better courts, and a faster path to the USSC;
* It's a general ban on even HOME DEFENSE, which most people would see as "way too much". (It's also a ban on street defense and more and it's all being fought in this one case.)
Anyways. Given the NRA's current support for another offensive gameplan, I would ask that Angel edit the Silveira site.
I support both the Silveira effort and the Cato/NRA plan in DC.
