|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
April 15, 2013, 08:36 PM | #176 | |
Staff
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
|
Quote:
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper |
|
April 15, 2013, 08:49 PM | #177 | |
Staff
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
|
Quote:
Jim March in post 159, speedrrracer in post 162 and press1280 in post 166 provide some useful perspective.
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper |
|
April 15, 2013, 08:57 PM | #178 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 26, 2005
Location: The Bluegrass
Posts: 9,137
|
Quote:
Sure, I was hoping Kachalsky would get cert, but on retrospect, it may be a good thing it didn't. Emotions and politics are running high right now about Newtown and various gun control measures. While the Supreme Court justices are supposed to be immune to both, they are human beings and can't help but be effected. So, maybe a "cool down" period will be helpful. I'm a "glass half full" type of guy. |
|
April 15, 2013, 09:19 PM | #179 | |||
Staff
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
|
Quote:
Quote:
Oh, and I guess I should comment on this -- When the Supreme Court denies certiorari it doesn't issue an opinion -- merely an order.
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper |
|||
April 15, 2013, 10:09 PM | #180 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 16, 2008
Posts: 1,184
|
Denying cert doesn't give this case any extra authority as it is well established that lower courts are not to draw any inference from a denial of cert.
I'm a little disappointed that cert was denied but there will be other opportunities. |
April 15, 2013, 10:41 PM | #181 | |
Member
Join Date: November 27, 2012
Posts: 33
|
Quote:
If gun rights attorneys are dumb enough to bring cases in unfavorable circuits, look for judges to hold: "as sister circuits have contemplated similar cases and have concluded 'Kachalsky,' we find that the facts and circumstances of this case are similar enough that such rationale ought to control here. Accordingly, we adopt and apply the Kachalsky rationale in the instant matter." Poof! In a couple sentences, Kachalsky becomes law in another circuit. Don't let that happen. Stop bringing gun cases. |
|
April 15, 2013, 10:50 PM | #182 |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,660
|
And you are who, to tell everyone else to stop bringing cases?
Or, are you here just to stir the pot? |
April 15, 2013, 11:45 PM | #183 | |
Staff
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
|
Quote:
And as for whether Kachalsky is persuasive authority in another circuit, it is up to the justices in that other circuit to decide if considering a case in which Kachalsky is cited. You continue to demonstrate that you don't know what you are talking about. So you continually reinforce my view that there's no reason to take you seriously.
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper Last edited by Frank Ettin; April 15, 2013 at 11:51 PM. |
|
April 15, 2013, 11:58 PM | #184 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 16, 2007
Posts: 2,153
|
Quote:
|
|
April 16, 2013, 05:30 AM | #185 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 12, 2005
Posts: 3,733
|
Come on guys, read what he wrote.
"If gun rights attorneys are dumb enough to bring cases in unfavorable circuits," He obviously meant we need to pick our battles so as not to let this setback gain further strength. Bring cases in more favorable regions, don't challenge this exact issue in an unfavorable circuit or you can expect to have this latest case reinforced.
__________________
"Religions are all alike - founded upon fables and mythologies." Thomas Jefferson "The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason." Benjamin Franklin |
April 16, 2013, 06:16 AM | #186 | |
Staff
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 8,817
|
Quote:
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some. |
|
April 16, 2013, 08:28 AM | #187 | |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,660
|
No Spats.
AZ is in the CA9... We know how they will rule on anything, um, gun. Sorry for you folks in CA (CA9), we can't fight there. WY? That's the CA10... We know they aren't friendly. See Peterson. Hmm .... Come to think of it, there isn't a single 2A friendly circuit to be found (CA7 was an aberration, yes?)! By the logic used by smoking357, we should indeed not file anywhere. Just let the probable unconstitutional laws role on. Like Maestro implies, we should just suck it up and take whatever the legislatures dish out. smoking357? If you are indeed an attorney, I'm glad you aren't mine. I would fire you for incompetence. ETA: Quote:
|
|
April 16, 2013, 08:31 AM | #188 |
Staff
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 8,817
|
Correct, Al. Perhaps I should have said "unfavorable States" rather than "unfavorable Circuits." My point is that our litigation has to occur where the Cases and Controversies occur.
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some. |
April 16, 2013, 08:36 AM | #189 |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,660
|
Yes Spats.
In order to win, we have to fight where the battles take us. That is, in every case, unfriendly districts and unfriendly circuits. |
April 16, 2013, 08:41 AM | #190 |
Junior member
Join Date: April 14, 2013
Location: Erph
Posts: 110
|
Plus, it's hard to say we've lost anything by losing a case...
The case was confronting a loss we'd already sustained, and the cases try to overturn them. Try it makes it closer to codified to have an official ruling, but it already was codified somewhere or it wouldn't be in the courts to begin with... We have to stand united, not just give up on CA, CT, CO, IL, MD or NY... |
April 16, 2013, 09:39 AM | #191 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 18, 2012
Posts: 389
|
Does this mean that SCOTUS will never hear Kachalski? Can Gura ever re-apply for cert?
Can SCOTUS reverse their decision in the future? Like lets say when Gura does file for cert in Woollard... can SCOTUS decide then that they want to hear Kachalski too? |
April 16, 2013, 09:46 AM | #192 | |
Staff
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
|
Quote:
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper |
|
April 16, 2013, 10:09 AM | #193 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 16, 2007
Posts: 2,153
|
That's right, Frank. And do I recall correctly that same panel discussing (gasp) the anti-tyranny purpose to the second amendment?
|
April 16, 2013, 11:32 AM | #194 | |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,660
|
Quote:
|
|
April 16, 2013, 11:37 AM | #195 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 24, 2008
Location: Orange, TX
Posts: 3,078
|
Quote:
|
|
April 16, 2013, 12:14 PM | #196 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,057
|
Quote:
As for bad cases making bad caselaw, there is something of a point. Gura warned us about that. We've seen some dunderheaded lawsuits brought by individuals and local organizations that have done this. However, Gura's won for us in the Supreme Court twice. I'm inclined to trust his judgment on this.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe |
|
April 16, 2013, 01:25 PM | #197 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 18, 2012
Posts: 389
|
IL Attorney General Lisa Madigan does seem emboldened
http://watchdog.org/79931/lisa-madig...ncealed-carry/
My take on it is that the Illinois anti gun politicians will now try to use "may issue" as a way to prevent people from carrying... If Woollard doesn't prevail, I think people in Illinois will see the current ban replaced with "shall not" issue. I guess it all depends on how they duke it out in the legislature, but the IL AG sure seems encouraged by cert denial of Kachalski. It also seems to me that she may not appeal Moore now. If they can, in effect, re-create the current ban via a "may issue" system that actually issues to no one, why appeal Moore? |
April 16, 2013, 01:44 PM | #198 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 30, 2007
Location: South CA
Posts: 566
|
Quote:
Bleh.
__________________
Loyalty to petrified opinions never yet broke a chain or freed a human soul in this world — and never will. — Mark Twain |
|
April 16, 2013, 01:47 PM | #199 | |
Junior member
Join Date: April 14, 2013
Location: Erph
Posts: 110
|
Quote:
Seems like CA and NY would spawn tons of cases... |
|
April 16, 2013, 03:11 PM | #200 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 14, 1999
Location: Pittsburg, CA, USA
Posts: 7,417
|
Quote:
So, the ONLY things that can happen via the legislature is strong shall-issue or "Vermont carry" if they can't make a deal and the 7th Circuit's order shooting down all IL anti-carry laws happens as is scheduled to happen in July. Madigan therefore is sitting on a very bad hand. She can appeal to the US Supremes and likely hand us gunnies a powerful win, or she lets the 7th Circuit ruling stand in which case we get either strong shall-issue or Vermont Carry in a matter of months.
__________________
Jim March |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|