Comments on: Up next

By: straightarrrow

straightarrrow — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 20:25:42 +0000

Funny how all the Europhiles that say we should be more Europeanly nuanced don’t pick up on this and demand that laws against suppressors be repealed.

By: straightarrrow

straightarrrow — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 20:24:29 +0000

Some European countries require suppressors by law as an act of consideration for the ears of non-shooters.

By: Xrlq

Xrlq — Sun, 23 Mar 2008 02:36:10 +0000

I think the next step is challenging a DC clone that sits in a state, just to clarify that the Heller rule applies to federal, state and local government alike. Handing the courts too many issues at once is a good way to lose in one fell swoop a series of cases you otherwise would have won.

By: ParatrooperJJ

ParatrooperJJ — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 15:37:44 +0000

Link to bane’s site is miscoded.

By: SayUncle

SayUncle — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 15:18:04 +0000

I think the next part is challenging all the cases that circuit courts decided using the collective rights myth of the second amendment.

By: Standard Mischief

Standard Mischief — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 15:16:21 +0000

Yea, I know it hasn’t been decided yet, but assuming that the supremes chose to understand the 2nd protects rights of individuals — specifically, DC isn’t allowed to legislate out the “keep” part — I think we ought to go for the “bear” part next. Force DC to enact “may issue” just like Maryland has.

Unfortunately, without court “standing” reform, it may be another 70 years before we get another “clean” case before the supremes.

By: Mike M.

Mike M. — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 13:52:34 +0000

Suppressors aren’t just neighborly, they are a safety factor in indoor ranges. I would give long odds that suppressors will reduce lead emissions into the atmosphere (from the lead styphanate in most primers), which would allow a lot of indoor ranges to reopen.