View Single Post
Old September 13, 2010, 05:40 PM   #32
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 10,326
Quote:
Patches, you're assuming that the court will rule that strict scrutiny applies.
It's an equal protection case involving a "fundamental" enumerated right. It'd be hard to get around that.

In Boston or Baltimore, maybe. In Lubbock, I think we stand a good chance. Furthermore, the other side has to articulate an "important" government interest at the very least. What government interest is served by denying 2nd Amendment rights to 18-20 year olds?

While the other side could trot out selective mortality tables to show that folks in that age range die at higher rates than other ranges, the range in question usually covers up to age 25. Basically, I'm more likely to get shot at 18 than I am at 40, but I'm still more likely to get shot at 22 than I am at 40.

Quote:
Not meaning to change the subject, but is this law suit really the efforts of the NRA or are they claiming credit for someone else's work?
And we're off the reservation. Bonus points for attempted subtlety, however.

D'Cruz v. BATFE is being argued by attorneys from Cooper & Kirk, who are regular litigants for the NRA.
__________________
In the depth of winter I finally learned that there was in me an invincible summer.
--Albert Camus
Tom Servo is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.04936 seconds with 7 queries