View Single Post
Old 11-26-2012, 8:31 PM
kcbrown's Avatar
kcbrown kcbrown is offline
Calguns Addict
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 8,633
iTrader: 1 / 100%

Originally Posted by bulgron View Post
This panel will probably do what the 9th circuit panels always do: they'll start with the conclusion that they want to find (in this case, "We don't want ordinary citizens carrying guns because we think ordinary citizens are dangerous and emotionally unstable") and then they'll work backwards to arrive at the arguments they need to make in order to arrive at that conclusion. This is especially true since all the powers that be in the 9th circuit also really, really want to stop ordinary citizens from carrying arms, and the 9th circuit justices are highly influenced by the opinions of the powers that be.


We're going to lose this case in the 9th.

SCOTUS or bust. And it has to be SCOTUS before Obama has a chance to reshape that court, too. Once again, I can't thank enough all the gun owners nationwide who thought voting for Obama, or voting for no one at all, was okay because their gun rights looked secure to them.

O'Scannlain wrote the majority opinion in Nordyke III in which they attempted to neuter "strict scrutiny" as applied to the 2nd Amendment. Looks to me like he is no friend of ours.

We will lose this case in the 9th Circuit. The faster, the better. We only have a very limited window of opportunity in the Supreme Court before it slams shut in our faces.
The Constitution is not "the Supreme Law of the Land, except in the face of contradicting law which has not yet been overturned by the courts". It is THE SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND, PERIOD. You break your oath to uphold the Constitution if you don't refuse to enforce unadjudicated laws you believe are Unconstitutional.

The real world laughs at optimism. And here's why.

Last edited by kcbrown; 11-26-2012 at 8:34 PM..
Reply With Quote