Ammo For Sale

« « Oh dear | Home | SWAT Teams » »

There’s a reason for that

Bitter writes:

Why can’t we ever find that perfect plantiff for good gun rights related cases? I know, just because someone’s life isn’t perfectly in order doesn’t mean that they don’t have valid cases on whatever gun related matter is bothering them at the time. But when it comes to winning the public opinion on a case and turning the tide of public support in your favor, you do need a nearly flawless plantiff.

I concur. However, it is generally the case that someone arrested on gun crimes was likely doing something else in addition to said crime. Not everyone’s a Boy Scout. That’s not the case in Bitter’s example as this guy did it later. But, generally speaking, law abiding folks don’t draw a lot of attention to themselves.

7 Responses to “There’s a reason for that”

  1. _Jon Says:

    If I were Rich and Powerful, I would setup a “Fund” to pay a person to volunteer to violate a law and allow the “Fund”‘s lawyers to argue the case. The purpose would be to get bad law revoked. The risk is that he court could suffer cranial-anal inversion and find guilty, thus depriving a citizen of freedoms. But I think – for sufficient amounts and very detailed plans – patriots would be willing to take that risk.

    But alas, I am neither rich enough no powerful enough.

    Yet.

  2. SayUncle Says:

    Jon, interesting but who would volunteer to risk 10 years in federal pound me in the ass prison? I’d say not many takers.

  3. tgirsch Says:

    I think another piece of the puzzle is that most gun rights types who would be willing to be that kind of plaintiff are generally not (at least in my experience) the types of people whose charisma will win over John Q. American. Add to that the fact that in order to gain public sympathy, you have to seem like a victim, which is rather hard to do when you’re packing a .45ACP.

  4. Captain Holly Says:

    “Why can’t we ever find that perfect plantiff for good gun rights related cases?”

    Ask, and ye shall receive. He’s a Utah CCW permittee, BTW.

    http://www.keepandbeararms.com/news/nl/disp.asp?d=3/1/2006

  5. Bitter Says:

    Already knew about that case before the releases went out. It’s just that the Utah guy is the exception, not the rule. I also know the effort it took to find a good plantiff in that situation because I know some of the people behind the lawsuit. Don’t think there weren’t more people who didn’t have shit happen to them before the perfect storm of a case came up.

  6. _Jon Says:

    Well, men and women serve in the military and risk a lot more for a lot less, financially.
    I think there would be quite a few takers for say … $1 million per year served.

    Like I _meant_ to say; “alas, I am neither rich enough nor powerful enough.”

  7. Heartless Libertarian Says:

    Wasn’t there a Navy officer who sued NY state trying to get a non-resident concealed weapons permit? IIRC, he lost at the Fed Circuit Court level and it didn’t go on from there.

    As an aside, I’m in the Army, haven’t broken any laws, and if Uncle Sam ever sends me (and my gun collection) to one of those GFW states (Ft Irwin, CA and Ft Drum, NY are possiblities, as is DC) you might have your test case.

Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.

Uncle Pays the Bills

Find Local
Gun Shops & Shooting Ranges


bisonAd

Categories

Archives