This isn’t the first time I read in a gun blog the assumption that the good guys are gonna win the McDonald Case going up before the Supreme Court. Like it is a fait accompli.
I am not so optimistic. Not because I think there is any flaws in the argument, or the current court composition is particularly unfriendly, etc., its’s just that I am more pessimistic by nature. It’s still down to the whim of Justice Kennedy. If his mood swings the other way at a critical week in the up coming year… Doom.
I just worry. We could snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
And if that happens the finger pointing will phenomenal. Not just the NRA pointing at Gura and vice versa… There is a lot of important ramifications for all liberty leaning causes. This isn’t just a gun case. It’s a Constitution case. I happen to be a big fan of the Constitution and a loss on the 14th Amendment that doesn't correct past wrongs undermines that sacred document. Yes, I said sacred. The Constitution should be held sacred by even rock ribbed atheists for what it ideally provides/ensures.
Anyway. On McDonald. I have my fingers crossed and there is the tiniest glimmer of hope in my heart, but I won’t count this chicken until it hatches. If it does hatch, the forces of good and lovers of liberty aren’t done. Not by a long shot. There is still lots of toiling in the fields to do. But a victory in this case will help. Indeed. The RIGHT victory will help even more, depending on the vote and the majority/dissent opinions
I am not so optimistic. Not because I think there is any flaws in the argument, or the current court composition is particularly unfriendly, etc., its’s just that I am more pessimistic by nature. It’s still down to the whim of Justice Kennedy. If his mood swings the other way at a critical week in the up coming year… Doom.
I just worry. We could snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
And if that happens the finger pointing will phenomenal. Not just the NRA pointing at Gura and vice versa… There is a lot of important ramifications for all liberty leaning causes. This isn’t just a gun case. It’s a Constitution case. I happen to be a big fan of the Constitution and a loss on the 14th Amendment that doesn't correct past wrongs undermines that sacred document. Yes, I said sacred. The Constitution should be held sacred by even rock ribbed atheists for what it ideally provides/ensures.
Anyway. On McDonald. I have my fingers crossed and there is the tiniest glimmer of hope in my heart, but I won’t count this chicken until it hatches. If it does hatch, the forces of good and lovers of liberty aren’t done. Not by a long shot. There is still lots of toiling in the fields to do. But a victory in this case will help. Indeed. The RIGHT victory will help even more, depending on the vote and the majority/dissent opinions
6 comments:
Yup. Everyone's already counting this as a chicken, and it hasn't hatched yet.
It's going to be extra sucky if we lose.
Which is why NRA's intervention is GOOD.
Losing the "libertarian" case Gura was pushing would be bad for both guns and liberty.
Winning the narrow case the NRA is pushing is good for guns, and "OK" for liberty. WITHOUT requiring the Court to even address Gura's issues -- thus saving them for future cases (preferably cases that don't involve "scary things" like guns; from a libertarian POV, it doesn't matter if Gura's argument wins on a "gun" case or any other case -- so long as it wins.)
While there is a fair chance that the pants wetters would rebel at following Gura's logic -- because it involves scary guns.
Having the lower-profile NRA option fully represented gives them an out they can take and still look themselves in the mirror the next day.
Atheist here.
The Constitution's sacred.
I'll add a "ditto".
I'm worried about this one. I'm keeping the fingers crossed, but this could be a disaster if it doesn't go our way. I live in New Jersey, where things are already bad. I'd hate to think what things would be like if they had the Supreme Court saying they were free to do as they please.
One thing that worries me is that Scalia's generally not a big fan of incorporation.
Which is why a camel's nose -- THAT STILL WINS THE CORE OF TEH CASE -- is a better approach than an In Your Face Libertarian 100% or Nothing! approach.
Post a Comment