Legislation is a good way to clear up statutory problems, and depending on venue, could be easier than getting a case before the Supreme Court.
Another thing some folks fail to understand is that the stakes are potentially much higher by taking the litigation route. A loss in the higher courts makes for bad case law and sets a precedent that could cause big problems later (some smaller gun rights groups aren't getting this).
Consider the Heller situation. Fortunately, we won. What if we hadn't? It would be an understatement to call the result of a ruling against us a disaster. Once set, the courts are loathe to overturn precedent. Heck, Miller still stands, 75 years later.
A loss in the legislature just means we try again next year. It took a while, but Wisconsin was able to get concealed carry by getting a better governor in office. Though there was some great case law set there by the Shultz case, the most expedient way to get it was to wait for a change in circumstances.
Sometimes, legislation isn't going to work, and sometimes we have a constitutional question that needs to be answered in a universal and decisive manner, and that's where the courts come in. We just need to be sure we're picking fights we can win, as a loss in one case can affect the entire country.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change.
--Randall Munroe
|