View Single Post
  #140  
Old 12-11-2012, 2:04 PM
Mulay El Raisuli's Avatar
Mulay El Raisuli Mulay El Raisuli is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Oceanside, CA
Posts: 3,597
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crom View Post
I just can't believe how awesome this decision is. The panel squarely dealt with the second amendment. No dancing around the issue, no coy tactics. It is pure 2A awesomeness. There is no doubt in my mind that this case is the biggest win we have had since 2010 in McDonald. It's pure joy. I'd quote some of it for you, but it's an easy read and everyone should take time to read it. It's not written in legalese.



Big congrats to David Sigale and SAF. Whoo Hoo!

Yes, it IS written so that an Ordinary Mortal can read/understand it. That's pretty unusual for an Appellate Court.

And, yes, it is especially gratifying that it was a pure a 2A case. No dancing around at all.

As for references to Kachalski, it delivered as big a smack-down to the 2nd Circuit as one Circuit gets with another. Clearly written to be a Circuit split. Which we're going to have & need.

Because all of the speculation about what kind of law the Ill. legislature will write is meaningless. Rahm is the mayor & so Rahm will make the decision as to whether to appeal or not. You can bet your lungs on it; he'll appeal. Which (as was the case with Heller & McDonald) is going to be a good thing for us.

The reasoning here may or may not help with the PRK carry cases. Nothing here is binding, but it is persuasive. If the 9th goes along, we'll still have a split because of the 2nd Circuit.

There's not a lot of time for anything to affect the reciprocity Bill. But, it MAY provide 'cover' to those on the fence IF it does come to a vote.

I especially liked the bit about how the other 49 states do things. Nothing here will matter to the PRK legislature, but the gong has been sounded; crap that applies in one state only ain't gonna fly for much longer.

Its not often that that I laugh out loud while reading Appellate Court Opinions, but this one giot me doing so twice: I'm with randomBytes in liking the reference to slashing a "Santa with Elves" painting. But my favorite was the reference to sex on the sidewalk. THAT one is definite keeper. It supported the logic of that part of the Finding AND was real damn funny.


The Raisuli

Now, where is KCBrown to tell us all why this is really just a massive loss?
__________________
"Ignorance is a steep hill with perilous rocks at the bottom"

WTB: 9mm cylinder for Taurus Mod. 85
WTS: Model 94 AE 30-30
Reply With Quote