Fair weather federalism
I concur with the little devil. The solution to the problem of criminally negligent police raids is definitely local. And those solutions should involve putting the police involved in jail.
Update: Insty gets all law-professor on us and sets us straight.
November 29th, 2006 at 11:58 am
Don’t forget those “rubber stamp”, or “I’ll fill in the blanks later” or the “well, we’ll keep this sealed under court order because it might be embarrassing to the police”, judges and the warrants they sign off on.
November 29th, 2006 at 3:54 pm
That depends on what the meaning of “is” “straight” is. His explanation for why he supposedly is not a fair-weather federalist would be fine if he applied it with any consistency, but to do that, he’d have to concede that Terri Schiavo activists and a Congress that funds scientific research selectively aren’t really fair-weather federalist, either – for precisely the same reasons he claims not to be one himself.
November 29th, 2006 at 3:55 pm
That first “is” was supposed to be crossed out.
November 29th, 2006 at 7:49 pm
And here is the very reason so many want us disarmed and/or controlled. While corrupt and morally cowardly local DA’s and PD’s can arrange immunity from the law of man for their agents that commit crimes against citizens, they can do nothing to grant immunity from the laws of physics.
Hence, the desire to repeal the law of survival instinct by denying the tools of that survival in the hopes that we become genetically incapable of even desiring to defend ourselves.