What is the Supreme Court Date?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Since Heller doesn't involve any federal agency, it is pointless to continue to talk about it as if it did.
Click to expand...

It's a matter of a precedent being set in the DC Circuit. They've already stated in this case the Second is an individual right. Therefore in future cases regarding federal laws/regs they can be challenged in the DC Circuit which has already ruled the Second is an individual right, making a favorable decision more likely.
 
I don't think anybody made the assertion that it was happening in Heller/Parker. They were just pointing out that the decision in Parker had important consequences for gun laws in general even if the Supreme Court denied cert.
 
So what we really need now is for someone to challenge the ATF in the DC courts. Given the level of money that is already being pumped into Heller by Levy and Cato I am thinking that it will likely be somone else.

So where is the NRA anyway?
 
Why don't you sue ??? What do you need the [ineffective, worthless, backstabbing, choose-your-own-adjective] NRA for ???
Click to expand...

Because that is what I pay the NRA for. Unfortunately I don't have the $10-30 Million it will take. But even if I did, I likely could not legally anyway.

Seems to me that this would be something worth doing. But then the whole Parker Case was worth doing... at least it seems to me it was...
 
Submit a Form 1 to make a machinegun.
Get application denied by BATFE.
Sue in DC court for reversal of denial based on Parker.
Yes - write the suit yourself, based largely on replacing every instance of "handgun" in the Parker decision with "machinegun".
Should be pretty darn straightforward to do.
Should scare enough deep-pockets types to attract their help.

And FWIW: Parker/Heller was funded for about $25,000. Get a home equity loan.
 
And FWIW: Parker/Heller was funded for about $25,000. Get a home equity loan.
Click to expand...

I guess. Now if I can only get lawyers of the caliber of Levy and Gura to take the case on for free I should be good to go.
 
And FWIW: Parker/Heller was funded for about $25,000. Get a home equity loan.
Click to expand...

I seem to recall in one of the many interviews about the subject, Bob Levy said he had spent around $1.5 million on Parker just to get it this far. In any case, I'd be shocked if you could get a good Supreme Court challenge going for $25k. Hell... I've seen companies spend six figures on civil litigation and never even make it to trial at the District Court level (and that didn't include settlement costs).
 
Bob Levy said he had spent around $1.5 million on Parker just to get it this far.
Click to expand...

That was just his money. I got the impression from the piece it was much higher. That was about six months ago.

The spirirt is willing but the pocketbook isn't. Which is why we have the NRA. To do as a group what we can not do on our own... defend ourselves from our super power government.

So where are they? Is there no fight worth fighting on that ground?
 
Titan6, look at the way the ACLU does the "Christmas display on public property" cases.

The ACLU is not the petitioner. They find a local resident who's offended that there's a Christmas tree/Santa Claus/Baby Jesus in front of City Hall/in the Park and file the case in the local court. The difference is that if Mr Offended loses, he just remains offended, if a gun owner loses a court case, he loses his 2A rights forever.

Follow Mr Donath's advice and ask the NRA/GOA/ etc. to back you up. The NRA can't sue, but you can.

The spirirt is willing but the pocketbook isn't. Which is why we have the NRA. To do as a group what we can not do on our own... defend ourselves from our super power government.

So where are they? Is there no fight worth fighting on that ground?
Click to expand...

No, but as you stated court fights cost BIG $$$$. Spend more then 20 minutes around here and someone will start an "I hate the NRA because they're begging for money again" thread. Everyone seems to think that the NRA is just sitting on piles of cash.
 
The NRA can't sue, but you can.
Click to expand...

In my particular case I can not. Maybe in a few years but not right now. Besides, I currently have two fully automatic belt fed machine guns within arms reach of me at this very moment as well as select fire M4. :D . True they are not mine... but hey I still have them.

Everyone seems to think that the NRA is just sitting on piles of cash.
Click to expand...

I don't know about piles of cash but they sure have a lot of money. I think the complaint is that here we have a chance to go for the throat and we are not seeing a lot of positive action here... just a lot more of business as usual and even some negative stuff....

But this isn't really about the NRA. It is about finding someone with the weight to do it. If the NRA makes themselves obsolete by not doing it... so be it.
 
The difference is that if Mr Offended loses, he just remains offended, if a gun owner loses a court case, he loses his 2A rights forever.
Click to expand...

Well, not always. If someone wants to sue over the MG ban, they could simply send in the form to make a MG which of course BATFE will deny, and no laws have been broken and the lawsuit can go forward.
 
The NRA is involved in Heller, just not directly, mostly because during the trial phase they made some inept moves and Levy has asked them to stay out.

The NRA is still our biggest dog in this fight, and is the only organization out there that can organize the legislative and judical battle that is going to begin the second Heller is denied/granted cert and then decided. No matter what occurs, Heller is going to shake things up.

The NRA, since the Clinton years, has tended to focus on legislative action to protect and expand gun-rights. Legislation is much easier for a lobby to influence, through elections, bills, votes, etc. The judical branch is a lot more independent (as it should be), and litigation is difficult...

Levy spent years looking for the "perfect" client(s), building his "pure" Second Ammendment case, and got really lucky with the particular panel he got at Appeal. The NRA was trying to get him to adopt a more cautious approach, and to build in a "backdoor" so that if he lost it wouldn't be on 2A grounds.

The NRA plays things slow, safe, and steady. There is nothing wrong with that approach, the stakes are very high here.
 
Here's a silly questions -

A lot of speculated what to do or what will happen if we lose big.

What will you do if this becomes the next Brown vs Board of Education? that is, a really big win?

I am curious because while a lot of people have had "doomsday" preps, thoughts and even plans, does anyone have a "superbowl win" plan?

Big party? Buying spree?
 
Levy spent years looking for the "perfect" client(s), building his "pure" Second Ammendment case, and got really lucky with the particular panel he got at Appeal. The NRA was trying to get him to adopt a more cautious approach, and to build in a "backdoor" so that if he lost it wouldn't be on 2A grounds.
Click to expand...

I sense an ABA Journal reader ;)
 
The NRA plays things slow, safe, and steady. There is nothing wrong with that approach, the stakes are very high here.
Click to expand...

It is hard to argue that the NRA has not achieved quite a lot nationwide (with a few exceptions) since their defeat...compromise...victory whatever in '94. I know some people are getting impatient (like me for example). Especially with all the craziness at DOJ this year and the anti-freedom GWOT acts/laws.
 
Also I don't think Levy got "that" lucky. He really is good. But given the choice between lucky and good I will take lucky any day.
 
Thain, I have to vigorously disagree with most of what you said.


The NRA is still our biggest dog in this fight, and is the only organization out there that can organize the legislative and judical battle that is going to begin the second Heller is denied/granted cert and then decided. No matter what occurs, Heller is going to shake things up.
Click to expand...

The NRA is not equipped to deal with Heller if cert is granted. It will be people like Bob Levy, David Kopel, and Eugene Volokh who are equipped to. They will be the ones who will write excellent amicus briefs, hold moot court exercises, and otherwise prepare for the fight. The NRA has little to no experience in this regard compared to others.

The NRA, since the Clinton years, has tended to focus on legislative action to protect and expand gun-rights. Legislation is much easier for a lobby to influence, through elections, bills, votes, etc. The judical branch is a lot more independent (as it should be), and litigation is difficult...
Click to expand...

Early in the Clinton years they refused to do just this. I resigned my membership in disgust when Tanya Metaksa refused to defend scary looking firearms possession rights absent any hunting use. This was during testimony before then Rep. Charles Schumer as a subcommitte chairman.


Levy spent years looking for the "perfect" client(s), building his "pure" Second Ammendment case, and got really lucky with the particular panel he got at Appeal. The NRA was trying to get him to adopt a more cautious approach, and to build in a "backdoor" so that if he lost it wouldn't be on 2A grounds.
Click to expand...

The NRA absolutely tried to sandbag this case from the get go. I think your statement wrongly implies they had a minor disagreement. Nothing could be further from the truth. Read about it in Bob Levy's own words about how hard the NRA worked to kill this case.


The NRA plays things slow, safe, and steady. There is nothing wrong with that approach, the stakes are very high here.
Click to expand...

The problem is that there is nothing safe and steady about a non rights based approach to guns. The operative part of RKBA is right. The NRA has consistently refused to go to the mat to establish such a right. They would rather engaged in political battles which empower THEM.

All that said, I probably should have stayed in the NRA and fought from the inside to change things. Maybe I will join again and try to do so. Until then though, I will have no illusions about the organization and their behavior. That is what I judge them on.
 
The NRA was not trying to kill Parker with the introduction of the bill. That bill has been introduced nearly every year since the ban started. Ron Paul has been a co-sponsor every year he has served in congress.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

U
  • Locked
Supreme Court Weighs Review of San Francisco Gun Control Scheme
Replies
18
Views
2K
Frank Ettin
Frank Ettin
F
  • Locked
Georgia Carry files Heller brief.
Replies
0
Views
360
Feral Cowboy
F
M
  • Locked
How are Supreme Court orders enforced?
2
Replies
36
Views
3K
Sam
S
T
  • Locked
US district court civil suits...
Replies
2
Views
486
Frank Ettin
Frank Ettin
John Ross
  • Locked
MO: No Supreme Court ruling yet, but...
Replies
8
Views
822
joelr
J
Back
Top