What The World Needs Now

Love. Sweet love.

The Heller case was intentionally narrowly defined. Well, Heller WAS a narrow plea. Baby steps. Gura conceded many points, like the constitutionality of licensing, in order to focus on the most important and strongest point, the existence of an individual right If he plead for individual rights and the folly of a licensing system, the case might have been rejected or watered down, or concentrated on tertiary aspects to the main point. We won on this main point, the individual right. The other points will have to be address in various ways over time. Baby steps. Keep moving the ball downfield. Compromise does not mean "come around to their way of thinking on everything" anymore, or compromising from a starting point of their choosing and one that keeps moving in their direction. Maybe we can set the start point from now on and make THEM compromise, now that we have a bit of the initiative.

We need a ruling in the future as to what "dangerous and unusual weapons" are, because those that would ban guns will argue that all guns are dangerous and unusual, and have succeeded in making death by hanging, once a common method of execution, considered unusual under "cruel and unusual"

We need a ruling about what is a legal purpose, exactly, extending from "legitimate legal purpose, such as self-defense." What does "such as" also entail?

We need a ruling on incorporation. Does the Heller ruling apply to all the states under the 14th Amendment, or just DC? We in sympathy with the 2nd know, but the rulings finding will be challenged in this way by the antis I am sure.

We need to put a nail in the coffin on the opinions in the dissent to prevent them from morphing into some new rationale to restrict the people, based on the "we almost got it, there, just a little push." principle.

We need a ruling on what forms of licensing are over-burdensome, because Heller expressly permitted DC to license firearms, and the antis can go nuts applying that everywhere with high bars to qualification and excessive annual fees for renewal and prohibitive and extensive bureaucratic hoops to jump through. Picture New York City or Massachusetts licensing applied everywhere, but twice as onerous.

We need a ruling on what is a "weapon in common use at the time." Semi-automatic pistols are become more common than revolvers. AR-15 are becoming more common than lever action rifles. Wouldn't it be ironic if the gun-grabbers got the revolvers and lever guns put on the verboten list, but had to accept the modern sidearms?

We need to guard against the creation of MORE "sensitive public places" in the same vein of encroaching non-smoking areas being, well, EVERYWHERE, including inside your own home (the recently proven benign second-hand cigarette smoke might leak over to a school 2 miles away!)

We still need to make it a losing proposition for candidates to adopt anti-rights policies and still have a chance of being elected. At least as much as possible. To do this, WE need to keep to our reasonable ways. We can't go all loony and such. The REAL definition of loony. Gun-grabbers think anyone that owns a .22 revolver that they had fun plinking with once 10 years ago a loony.


We still need to ridicule the irrational fantasists on the anti side using the same tactics of reasoned argument and citation of actual facts that most of us already use.