Comments on: unusual and dangerous http://www.saysuncle.com/2008/06/26/unusual-and-dangerous/ Remember, I do this to entertain me... not you. Mon, 13 Feb 2012 16:31:15 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: A Guy http://www.saysuncle.com/2008/06/26/unusual-and-dangerous/comment-page-1/#comment-202334 A Guy Fri, 27 Jun 2008 04:33:25 +0000 http://www.saysuncle.com/?p=16214#comment-202334 I basically agree with David. Nino appears to have take everything as far as he could, but not so far as to lose Kennedy. Also, it's a "one step at a time" thing. W/ the right pressure, each precedent will get a little bit better. I basically agree with David. Nino appears to have take everything as far as he could, but not so far as to lose Kennedy.

Also, it’s a “one step at a time” thing. W/ the right pressure, each precedent will get a little bit better.

]]> By: David http://www.saysuncle.com/2008/06/26/unusual-and-dangerous/comment-page-1/#comment-202293 David Thu, 26 Jun 2008 20:42:24 +0000 http://www.saysuncle.com/?p=16214#comment-202293 I've got a slightly different take on it <a href="http://www.softgreenglow.com/wp/?p=5970" rel="nofollow">here.</a> Basically, I think Scalia did us a favor. I’ve got a slightly different take on it here. Basically, I think Scalia did us a favor.

]]> By: Boondoggie http://www.saysuncle.com/2008/06/26/unusual-and-dangerous/comment-page-1/#comment-202214 Boondoggie Thu, 26 Jun 2008 15:33:35 +0000 http://www.saysuncle.com/?p=16214#comment-202214 I think there were some gymnastics going on there to avoid invalidating a lot of current laws. "Dangerous"? Would it be an "arm" if it wasn't dangerous? "Unusual"? M-16s are only unusual for home defense and lawful purposes because they're basically unobtainable. I think there were some gymnastics going on there to avoid invalidating a lot of current laws. “Dangerous”? Would it be an “arm” if it wasn’t dangerous? “Unusual”? M-16s are only unusual for home defense and lawful purposes because they’re basically unobtainable.

]]> By: Nomen Nescio http://www.saysuncle.com/2008/06/26/unusual-and-dangerous/comment-page-1/#comment-202204 Nomen Nescio Thu, 26 Jun 2008 15:06:42 +0000 http://www.saysuncle.com/?p=16214#comment-202204 seems to me "unusual and dangerous" is Scalia hedging against machineguns and hand grenades, respectively. well, that was to be expected, and at least he makes a decent argument out of it. i hate to admit it, but his reasoning on that point sounds better than what i could have produced; and it's a rare day you see <i>me</i> agreeing with Scalia. seems to me “unusual and dangerous” is Scalia hedging against machineguns and hand grenades, respectively. well, that was to be expected, and at least he makes a decent argument out of it. i hate to admit it, but his reasoning on that point sounds better than what i could have produced; and it’s a rare day you see me agreeing with Scalia.

]]> By: chris http://www.saysuncle.com/2008/06/26/unusual-and-dangerous/comment-page-1/#comment-202198 chris Thu, 26 Jun 2008 14:58:32 +0000 http://www.saysuncle.com/?p=16214#comment-202198 the problem is, NC has ruled that a gun is a dangerous or unusual weapon in relation to the "armed to the terror or the people" law... so how does this ruling expand that interpretation? the problem is, NC has ruled that a gun is a dangerous or unusual weapon in relation to the “armed to the terror or the people” law… so how does this ruling expand that interpretation?

]]>