We don't need THIS Supreme Court to open its collective mouth on anything so fundamantal as the Right to Keep and Bear Arms!

They would only screw it up royally at present.

Wait until we have a more favorable split in the Court.

And keep voting Republican!

If we had 60 Senators who were right-minded, we could have some decent conservative Justices on the Court, and on other federal benches!

Today, and tomorrow, and thereafter, there are gun shows across the Nation where gunowners and new gunowners alike are purchasing more and more weaponry, accessories, and ammunition!

So long as that IS occurring, we ARE preparing for the future!

Eric The(SlowAndSteadyWinsTheRace)Hun

Thanks, and from the procedural standpoint alone, the Silvera Case was messed up from the very beginning!

The attorneys for the NRA opposed it being brought forward at all.

We stood a good chance of getting a horrendus decision based upon half-baked arguments.

In the Appellate Court, the plaintiff's counsel, who was supporting the RKBA, FAILED TO EVEN FILE A REPLY BRIEF to the government's brief.

In appellate practice that is a real mistake. An almost unforgiveable mistake, since as Appellant you are entitled to the last word! And you can bat any opposing arguments out of the ballpark IF you have the material to do so.

This guy didn't have enough material to argue that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to Keep and Bear Arms?

I've seen some appellate attorney save their very best arguments and supporting materials FOR their reply brief!

And a lot of appellate court judges will read both the original brief and the reply brief of the Appellant's prior to reading the brief of the Appellee, simply in order to thoroughly understand how well the Appellee answers the issues on appeal.

We dodged the bullet on this one, folks!

Eric The(SorryForThePun)Hun

Quoted: Nothing obligates the Court to hear any particular case; they pick a case based on there being some interest amongst the Justices in the subject material or a sense that the case involves a  legal issue that needs to be addressed. Unlike the members here, most people don't find gun issues at the top of their agenda or area of interest.

That is quite true, except there is presently a division among the Courts of Appeal regarding the Second Amendment!

The 5th Circuit in the Emerson Case held that it secures an individual's right, but the 9th Circuit held in the Hickman Case that it secured nothing more than a collective right.

This is precisely the circumstance where a final, determinative opinion by SCOTUS is expected!

I think both sides of the RKBA issue within the Court itself are scrambling to hear that particular case that will support its view of the Second Amendment!

And God Help Us all, if the liberal wing of the Court gets the case that it wishes!

Eric The(WellArmed)Hun

Post from Sniper_408 -

Now this begs a question Eric; Under what terms should the 2nd be brought to the SCOTUS attention?

When we have a sufficient number of 'original intent' styled Justices on the Court who understand that the Second Amendment must be understood NOW as the Founding Fathers understood it THEN - as a bulwark against tyranny in any form, whether from your ne'er-do-well neighbor, local criminals, or from a central government gone ape-azzed wild and threatening your civil rights!

What should be the trigger that set's off the chain reaction leading  to them (SCOTUS) finally taking the case?

Ordinarily a split between the Circuits on a particular federal law will do it.

Here, we are talking about a split in the different Circuits about a FUNDAMENTAL LAW - the Second Amendment!  

Remember that in 1857, just as the Abolition of Slavery was becoming an important and emotional issue within the United States, the SCOTUS took up the case of Dred Scott, and came down on the issue of slavery in a manner that fueled the fire for a War Between the States!

The Abolition Movement was both devastated and strengthened by that decision.

In regards to the Second Amendment, just such a 'watershed' decision might occur.

For better or for worse.

I mean you just can't bring a case to their attention without first going trough State and Fedaral courts, or can you?

SCOTUS doesn't have original jurisdiction except in a very few, limited cases.

It will wait for either a State or Federal Case to work its way up through the appellate process.

And, as said before, it can then refuse to rule on the appeal, for reasons know but to itself, though it will always supply some reason for its decision.

No, for the present, we have the numbers in the Legislature to keep any further erosion of our gun rights.

It's the Anti-RKBA crowd that is attempting to obtain its goal through the Courts and not through the Legislatures.

We shouldn't desire to put ourselves in the position of the abolitionists in the late 1850s ~ getting an adverse result that will only seal the need for alternative measures to deal with this issue.

Eric The(Don'tWorryIfYouDon'tHaveFullAutoOnDayOneOfTheRevolution,YouWillOnDayTwo)Hun

Post from tcsd1236 -

If the Court will hear the case, hopefully the pro-gun side will put more effort into presenting its  supporting arguments for its position than it does in the court of public opinion on other gun laws.

Amen to that!

I think that the Silvera Case was simply some unwanted and unncessary 'grandstanding' by some California attorney to make a name for himself!

He wasn't, so I hear, well-versed in gun laws, the history of gun laws, or anything else that would have well-suited him to take this case in the first place!

As a matter of fact, I think that the plaintiffs he represented were not actual gun owners, but had only recently attempted to purchase weapons.

Some doctor and lawyer friends of his, IIRC!

Yeah, we definitely need another Clarence Darrow on this one.

Not another Johnnie Cochran!



Eric The('IfOriginalIntentDon'tFit,ItDon'tMeanShiite')Hun

Quoted: Ok, one final question;  whats taking so long for some of those old liberal judges to retire??

A 'whiff of grapeshot'?



No, that would be wrong!

Eric The(WeWillWinInTheEnd,NoMatterWhat)Hun

I would never, ever pass any background check!

Trust me on this one!

But thanks for your vote of confidence!

Eric The(WhenIWasYoungAndIrresponsible,Well,IWasYoungAndIrresponsible)Hun