Parker Poll
Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.
Uncle Pays the Bills
 |
|
Find Local
|
Categories
- ATF (769)
- Death Match (10)
- Eminent Domain (225)
- In the bag (9)
- Notes to Junior (546)
- Poker (74)
- Recipes (142)
- Shotgun Noob (11)
- The Airing of Grievances (19)
- uncategorized (47,725)
July 18th, 2007 at 10:42 am
[…] Now you go choose. […]
July 18th, 2007 at 11:25 am
[…] is running a poll on Parker. I’ll make my […]
July 18th, 2007 at 12:14 pm
options 1 and 3 would seem to have roughly the same effect in practice. i voted 1, because i think that’s the outcome that would rock SCOTUS’ various boats the least, while causing them the least amount of extra work and burden them with the least direct responsibility.
there’s no hope of #2 in the current political climate, and SCOTUS is way too political to ignore that fact. (there may be no hope for that under current legal doctrine, either, but i’m no lawyer so can’t guess.)
#4 would be too much of a political live grenade, so they’ll avoid that. #5 would accomplish much the same as numbers 1 and 3, but make them look chicken and land them with more culpability than #1. ergo, they won’t grant cert.
July 18th, 2007 at 12:26 pm
I have to go with #4, as the last six years have turned me completely cynical with regards to our government.
July 18th, 2007 at 12:55 pm
You left off the correct choice. Even if SCOTUS agrees with the DC Circuit and says “2nd is an individual right to own and have guns” it doesn’t actually do the legwork of applying that to the millions of laws on the books. It also doesn’t apply it to the states. It also doesn’t say where the right ends and the restrictions begin.
I predict
-SCOTUS takes the case
-SCOTUS affirms, saying 2nd = individual right to arms, handgun = arms. It is very difficult for them to answer otherwise and avoid harsh political consequences, especially in the legislative branch
-SCOTUS makes the opinion as narrow as possible
-this is still good, but we have another 10-15 years of litigation ahead of us to go after federal gun control legislation, not to mention the fight to get this incorporated into the 14th amendment
July 18th, 2007 at 12:58 pm
Note that none of your choices are actually possible…
-no matter how SCOTUS rules, the question of machine guns is not before the court
-no matter how SCOTUS rules, the question of how far the right goes (outside of DCs law) is not before the court
-while theoretically possible, a technical evasion will be very difficult. The litigators in this case did an outstanding case of avoiding all the technical pitfalls. I know the lawyers on this case and they are very smart guys who put years of effort into setting this up and finding plaintiffs.
July 18th, 2007 at 1:57 pm
I’m with the pessimists.
I don’t think SCOTUS will take the case.
If I am as wrong as I am usually, it will be a very narrow decision. In that event, why would they have taken the case at all…
July 18th, 2007 at 4:19 pm
Missing Option:
The SCOTUS takes the case and decides in favor of the ‘collective rights’ theory. The founding fathers rise from the dead and go ‘Revolutionary’ on their @$$…
July 18th, 2007 at 6:41 pm
I agree with Jim W. But let’s analyze that a bit. If the Court takes the case and affirms, in the process saying that the 2nd protects an individual right and that handguns are part of what is protected, then the floodgates open (on our side, for a change). The very first thing that will be challenged after such a ruling is the full auto ban, Section 922(o) of Title 18. It is a complete ban, by the fed.gov, of an entire class of weapons that arguably are the exact type of weapon protected under Miller. Further, the feds have previously used the argument that the ’34 NFA is OK because it isn’t a prohibition on certain guns, only a tax – while 922(o) prevents the tax on post-’86 civilian full autos from being collected, thereby completely undermining that argument. Between these factors, once a DC resident is able to get a case appealed up to the USSC on this issue, choice #2 becomes reality…though NOT at the time Parker is decided.
July 18th, 2007 at 7:37 pm
Paul W: Great analysis. You are using logic, however, and logic is rarely applied in politics.
The Left must be biting their nails right now. That is a reward in itself.
I was going to say that we should also be polled on what we want to have happen. In that case: “2” with punishments for any and all who violated their Oaths by passing restrictions into law, or who attempted, in direct and willful violation of the Constitution, to enforce them, thereby conspiring to inflict injury upon peaceable and honest American citizens.
July 18th, 2007 at 7:59 pm
Parker is no-lose for gun rights. We already live in the world where the collective rights side is assumed.
My hope (as I live in Chicago) is for incorporation to be the next battle.
July 18th, 2007 at 10:24 pm
The Supremes will not accept the appeal. Moreover, we don’t really want them to accept it.
However, if they do it is only because they have already decided on how they will rule. If this happens watch for the opinion to be issued within 30 days of the 2008 election.
July 18th, 2007 at 11:53 pm
What trainer said. It takes four Justices to grant certiorari and neither a pro-gun four nor an anti-gun four will take the chance whether they’ll get the fifth vote.
July 19th, 2007 at 4:18 am
Don’t forget all the circuits that are currently following US v Cases and its twisted interpretation of Miller. Those circuits currently treat the 2nd amendment as a decided issue even though it isn’t.
A fresh opinion from SCOTUS would force them to address a lot of questions about the scope of the 2nd that they avoided the first time around by saying that it was a collective right. And this has nothing to do with the incorporation issue. Every time the ATF charges someone with violating something in 18 USC Chapter 44, there is a potential 2nd amendment issue.
I expect a few decades of litigation as people iron out the details of what the 2nd amendment protects but nothing really earth shattering. The real big battle will come over incorporation for the states with really burdensome gun laws.
July 19th, 2007 at 8:53 am
[…] on the poll, with 284 votes, seems just over half of you think that the court will take the case, rule there is […]
July 19th, 2007 at 9:13 am
It’s very possible the USSC will deny cert, as they have a long history of doing when it comes to the Second Amendment. A circuit split makes this less likely, but then again, they didn’t hear the appeal to Emerson, either. If they take the case, as I suspect they will, I’m guessing they’ll issue a relatively short decision, which boils down to the following:
Yes, dumb-ass, the constitutional “right of the people to keep and bear arms” really does mean that the “people” have a “constitutional” right to keep and bear “arms.”
Yes, doubly-dumb-ass, the Parker plaintiffs really are “people.”
Yes, retarded-ass, the guns they want to own really are “arms.”
No, we’re not going to elaborate as to how much the federal government can regulate the right to bear arms without “infringing” it, except to say that a total prohibition of handguns and effective prohibition of self-defense with long guns clearly do infringe.
No, we’re not going to rule on whether or not the Second Amendment applies to the state. DC isn’t a state, Oliver-Willis-ass.