View Single Post
Old March 31, 2013, 11:45 PM   #149
Senior Member
Join Date: February 1, 2011
Posts: 345
There has never been a trial in any of these cases that established the "best science." Rather, on motions for summary judgment (which are to be granted only if there is no disputed issue of material fact), the trial courts have accepted the self-serving declarations of city/police officials as sufficient to carry the day on the burden of proof, presumably disregarding as irrelevant counter declarations by plaintiffs that seek to establish that the opinions of these officials are not supported by any evidence. The usual proclamation goes that more guns=more crime, and thus the (public entity) has a great public interest in limiting the number of guns in public in order to protect the public. You know, the old "there'll be blood in the streets if we allow concealed carry." Only Moore has concluded that these broad and unsupported allegations are not sufficient to satisfy intermediate scrutiny, and that there must be some factual showing that the restriction will in fact promote public safety.
62coltnavy is offline  
Page generated in 0.03130 seconds with 7 queries