View Single Post
Old June 7, 2021, 08:50 PM   #28
Senior Member
Join Date: July 26, 2005
Location: The Bluegrass
Posts: 9,112
About Cherminsky's comment: I have to believe his political views have so influenced him that he cannot even come close to viewing the district court decision impartially. IMO, he has deliberately misrepresented the judge's swiss knife metaphor as a literal comparison of a gun to a knife in order to undercut the decision's credibility. That may get him ink in a toady newspaper, but no reasonable jurist would so interpret the district judge's comment. Reasonable jurists might disagree with it, but they would at least understand the judge's comment as a metaphor.

The district judge put a lot of work in trying to touch all the bases and make extensive factual findings based on evidence at trial. Factual findings are reviewed on appeal in federal court only for clear error. That's not to say the opinion will stand because Cherminsky got at least one thing right---no federal court of appeals has found a ban on "assault weapons" unconstitutional.

Turning to an earlier comment:
even heard the argument from the anti's that because of the 21st amendment you can't ban alcohol I MEAN Well I guess irony has lost all meaning lol
Can't ban it nationally, but you can certainly ban it locally under the 21st Amendment. Or you could start a drive to amend the Constitution again and ban it nationally. I doubt many of the vocal gun grabbers would want to ban alcohol locally, say at the county level. And fewer still would want to revisit the failed experiment called Prohibition.
KyJim is offline  
Page generated in 0.06921 seconds with 8 queries