Heller in a handbasket
So, folks predict tomorrow is the big day. And we’re all pretty much predicting a major civil rights victory for the good guys. I mean, I’d say tonight, you could stick a piece of coal up Paul Helmke’s rear and by the end of tomorrow it would be diamond. But . . .
Roberta is asking what plan B is if it doesn’t go our way? I’d predict a shit storm of epic proportions if that happened. But we’d have all drink a nice big glass of ‘cool our shit’ juice and come up with a plan.
Update: All the marbles!
June 22nd, 2008 at 5:35 pm
I wouldn’t say no to a decent shitstorm, but I am optimistic about our chances.
I think that the Bradys got leaked the results last week and that is why they have been manning the life rafts so vigorously ever since.
June 22nd, 2008 at 5:35 pm
ya know, like 20 people have said the same thing.
June 22nd, 2008 at 5:36 pm
I am hoping for a Thomas opinion in Heller.
June 22nd, 2008 at 6:03 pm
No need to talk about plan b until we need to. Don’t stress out about it.
Drink a little of the ‘cool our shit’ kool-aid now,
June 22nd, 2008 at 6:08 pm
Okay, thoughts about the results of a negative ruling:
All private guns may now be banned and confiscated, with no Constitutional barrier — not gonna happen, as no place really bans every gun from every one. BUT anti-gunowner advocates are emboldened, and call for and predict more gun control than ever before — including all sorts of gun bans that they have tried to downplay lately.
Gunowners hear that and realize what the anti-gunowner advocates really want and that there is now no Constitutional or other judicial barrier to keep them from getting it — and if they don’t realize that on their own, the NRA and gunowner rights bloggers will help them realize that. And on their own or with help, gunowners will discover that the only obstacles to the anti-gunowner agenda now are:
Their personal efforts in opposing it.
Their donations volunteer efforts to groups opposing it.
Their votes for legislators who support us and their votes against legislators who oppose us, and their communication to legislators as to the electoral consequences of their actions.
In conclusion: We would be in for a heck of a fight, but not necessarily one we would lose.
June 22nd, 2008 at 6:56 pm
For now, it’s time to just keep whistling past the graveyard. No zombies in sight yet. Still whistling . . . continuing to whistle . . . zombie count still zero . . . whistling . . .
June 22nd, 2008 at 8:09 pm
What has been amazing to me is that I encounter so many people who profess they haven’t heard of this case, either before the 9th or the Supremes.
Of course, on the other hand, American Idoland So, You Think You Can Dance are top rated programs on the one-eyed monster.
Regards,
Rabbit.
June 22nd, 2008 at 9:31 pm
I’m hoping he writes not just an opinion, but THE MAJORITY opinion.
I’m much too used to him writing a dissent.
Re: Rabbit’s comment. I concur. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve told residents of Arizona, to their shock, that in the 9th Circuit there is no individual right to arms recognized by the Federal court system.
June 23rd, 2008 at 7:34 am
part of that might be that this case never went before the 9th circuit, it came up straight from D.C. which counts as its own circuit. D.C.’s weird in ways like that.
the rest is, i think, that nearly noone pays attention to supreme court cases before they’re decided. after all, how many folks do you know who knew about Boumediene before that verdict came down? in real life, i mean, not here among the online eggheads?
June 23rd, 2008 at 5:43 pm
plan ‘b’ …. bullets… lots of them… nahh… they are too damn expensive…
i dont know that we need a plan ‘b’ yet… we are still up by 9 points with 2 mins left in the game and the ball is on our side of the field… but it is only the second game of the season… so we gotta keep playing right or we will get stomped…
June 23rd, 2008 at 11:26 pm
Kevin, I agree that a majority opinion by Thomas would be nice in theory, but in practice I’m not so sure. Typically, he goes further than the other good guys, and I like that. Of course I’d like it even better if he wrote an opinion that was supposed to be a typical Thomas concurrence, but ends up being the majority opinion because everyone else signs on to it. More likely, if he writes for the majority it’s because he held back, not because everyone else leaped forward.
Then again, the idle speculation du jour is that the majority opinion will be from Justice Scalia. In theory, that would also be quite pleasant. In practice, it may have the same shortcomings as a Thomas concurrence, except that the majority will sign on to enough parts of Justice Scalia’s opinion to have it generally considered a majority opinion, even though the best parts are really just a concurrence.