Originally Posted by SPEMack618
This may be out of line, and possibly in the wrong forum, but would it behoove us, as the Pro-Second Amendment community, to wait before bringing courses before the Supreme Court.
I understand that cases work thier way through the lower level courts slowly as is, and we are worried about a change in the political landscape of SCOUTS, but would it help in anyway to take what the Army calls an Operational pause?
Your analogy to what the Army calls an operational pause is problematic, because the right to keep and bear arms is not an Army operation, and litigation in the courts is not a military operation. The analogy is one of apples being substituted for oranges.
Who would you propose be the one that refrains from defending their constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms? What criteria do you use, to determine who should and who should not defend their rights in courts of law?
You refer to what you characterize as the Pro-Second Amendment community. The right to keep and bear arms is not a community right, but an individual right. Should the defense of individual rights be determined by, or left to the whims of, a select community, rather than by individuals whose rights are being violated at the individual level?
That the United States Supreme Court doesn't accept a particular case, or a thousand cases, for certiorari does not inhibit its ability to arrive at the right conclusion, in a given case that comes before it in the future.
It would seem to me that the thing that the Army calls courage would make for a better analogy - and for better chances to see the right to keep and bear arms fleshed out in jurisprudence, than the thing that the the Army calls operational pauses.