[Al Norris]

Taking this one step at a time:

Originally Posted by Tom Servo

While I don't entirely disagree, I can see the NRA wanting to play it safe with regards to litigation.

As can I. The difference being that the litigation that was typical of the NRA, was not civil rights litigation. It was standard torts practice - Toss in the kitchen sink and see what floats to the top.

Gura & Company, started Parker as a civil rights tort, straight out of the annuls of the NAACP. That scared the NRA to no end, as they had never tried that style of litigation.

As was said, the Court was also different. That gives one cause to pause.

But with the win in the D.C. Circuit Court, that should have been the end of that particular litigation. We know it wasn't. D.C. just had to try and vindicate its own laws and pushed for cert.

At the same time, the NRA (via Chris Cox) tried to once again sabotage the litigation by pushing forward with a change in law, by the Congress.

As Bart mentioned, the Court balance was different before Parker became Heller, and a more than a few folks were nervous about its chances.

Um, not quite the way it happened, Tom:

John Roberts was sworn in as C.J. in Sept. 2005.
Samuel Alito was sworn in as an Assoc. Justice in Jan. 2006.
The decision on Parker came out on March 9, 2007.

The makeup of the Court had already changed. Instead of having a mere 3 solid conservative votes, we now had 4. It was acknowledged that Kennedy alone would be the telling factor.

A loss would have been a disaster, and there was talk that Gura was running off the reservation.

Yes, it was still a gamble. But it wasn't our side that was doing the gamble. The ball was in DC's court, and they ran with it.

As for Gura running off the reservation, that was straight out of the mouth of ... Drum Roll, please ... Chris Cox.

Sorry, but Mr. Cox is the greatest liability the NRA has, in its current litigation meme. He needs to be leashed. A very short leash.

Consider the arm of the NRA that Mr. Cox runs: NRA-ILA - Institute for Legislative Action. In that aspect, I have no quibble with what Chris does. He is simply, superb.

It is when he ventures out of his field of expertise and substitutes "Litigation" for "Legislative," that he becomes a liability.

Gura himself has mentioned that our greatest threat going forward is badly considered litigation, and we've seen some examples of that.

I wholly agree with that.

The NRA, in cooperation with the California Rifle and Pistol Association is doing a wonderful job of coordinating with Gura, Kates and Kilmer. Elsewhere... Not so good.

The kitchen sink that is Benson v. Chicago is an example. So too are the Texas cases - There has not been enough precedent built to sustain those cases. Their failure will be bad.

So too is Nordyke. It has become the proverbial albatross around the necks of gunnies in the 9th Circuit.