Thursday, November 08, 2007

The Day is Coming...

...for the Supremes to decide whether they're going to be taking District of Columbia v. Heller and rolls the dice...

Here's a somewhat disturbing article from the ABA Journal on the whole process:
“For gun owners and NRA members, this is the biggest legal battle that we have ever fought, or will ever fight—and its outcome will probably impact every law-abiding American gun owner,” LaPierre wrote in the five-page letter. “It is a battle we simply cannot afford to lose.”

Here’s where LaPierre heads into a wrong turn: It’s not an NRA case. In fact, the gun rights supporters who filed it complain that lawyers working for the NRA, concerned the case could backfire, spent considerable time and money trying to scuttle it. The association finally was dragged kicking and screaming before the Supreme Court after the prospect of review appeared more likely than it has in years.

“They recognized this was a good case and D.C. was the perfect place,” says plaintiffs lawyer Robert A. Levy, a senior fellow at Washington’s libertarian Cato Institute. “That’s what concerned them.”

9 comments:

Anonymous said...

NRA doesn't want the case to go to the Supreme Court because their cash cow is on the line, they think. What they won't acknowledge is that this IS an endless fight and they can still make money and pay LaPierre his outrageous salary. Either way it comes out, we win.

Lawrence said...

Folks

Even if we win, and I think we will, the left will never stop. They will do whatever is necessary to disarm all white male republicans.

Let us not be fooled...thats who they fear.

Anonymous said...

Oh, great, another conspiracy theory! (Ref.: "Anonymous" note #1; 5:37 P. M.) The NRA's biggest business is and has always been shooting! And Training. And now retailing. Having to rise-up and become the worlds largest CIVIL RIGHTS ORGANIZATION is a BIG distraction. I think that it also drives people away; those not up to having to fight for what they believe. That's the objective of the "anti's"
The tone of that note demonstrates that first, it was either written by a right-winger posing as one of us, or a disillusioned "one of us", or an "uninformed-how-things-work"'er. No offense intended, please. Continue the dialogue.
As Benjamin Franklin said on July 4, 1776, "We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately."
Life Member

ber950 said...

As a NRA Life member and a gun rights activist I have watched this case closely.

There is no doubt that the NRA tried more than once to scuttle this case. I can't say for sure what their reasoning was but they sure tried.

JoeMerchant24 said...

The concern from the NRA (at least what I gathered from the NRA and Heller v. DC presentations at the Gun Rights Polciy Conference) was that the NRA is worried about the fallout if D.C. wins.

The Gun Owners of America support the case, but wanted it expanded to include Miller v. U.S.

I agreed with Gura, the lead attorney, that we have to establish the legal precedent of an individual right before we tackle machine guns.

Today I wait with baited breath. If they opt not to hear the case (unlikely) then it's a small victory for us. If they do decide to take the case (likely) then it looks to be leaning toward our side, but no one knows what the end result will be.

Anonymous said...

The NRA's biggest business revolves arund its political power, not training and shooting. When they pump over $20 million into a presidential race there can be no doubt what is their primary work.

If it put its vast resources behing shooting then why is the Biancki slowly dieing off?

What the NRA started as and what it has become today are 2 different things. I don't recall any of those books that LaPierre rights and sells to be about training or shooting. They seem to be only about gun rights.

I applaud the NRA for fighting the gun rights fight. Of course, the second they sell out is the same time they lose my support and that of hundreds of thousands of other members.

If they support Rudy like Pat Robertson did then you know they don't care about the issue but only the power and access.

Hazcat said...

"If it put its vast resources behind shooting then why is the Biancki slowly dieing off?"

If you are talking about the Biancki Cup then I think I have an answer.

I believe most shooters would enjoy a competition that doesn't take a 5000.00 gun, MAJOR sponsorship and full time commitment to practice to even have a pray at being competitive.

For example look at the growing popularity of cowboy shooting in all of its forms. You can afford to buy the guns and there are clubs everywhere.

Another example would be the Ruger rim fire challenge. If they get behind it AND keep the super exotic guns out I think it will be hugely popular.

The Biancki is viewed as an elite sport.

Anonymous said...

To Address "Anonymous/10:29 A. M.:
The Political power that the NRA exerts is in representing it's MEMBERs and by default, other gun owners and users, the "industry", etc.; even it's critics who happen to used guns. They are MY lobbying activity.
I take it that you're not perhaps a member? I ran into a guy at a sportsmen's show that was crowing about how he quit the NRA because "they were too political". I asked where he thought the laws of the land were made and he looked at me blankly. The amassing crowd of spectators watching and listening to our vibrant debate waited for his reply. He answered by naming the capital of our state and "D. C.". I asked him who did the lawmaking there and he said the government. I asked "...and what process is used to do that?" and he said with authority "It's the Political Process!".
So, now I ask you, how would you recommend that we, or the NRA , or anyone else go about facilitating "political" change, if we don't engage in the very process that does that? Changing the process isn't the issue if you don't like it. Using it to facilitate change, or preserve our rights makes it only a "tool".
Life Member (Again.)
P. S.; The BianChi Cup may have simply run it's natural course. It isn't an activity that the masses can engage in, as hunting and shooting used to be and should be. It's mostly a spectator sport to me. But, it is still a part of the whole shooting picture and it is still very popular. Maybe something new will come that will fill the void that you see. What do you suggest?

xyz said...

hazcat re your post


“"If it put its vast resources behind shooting then why is the Biancki slowly dieing off?"

If you are talking about the Biancki Cup then I think I have an answer.

I believe most shooters would enjoy a competition that doesn't take a 5000.00 gun, MAJOR sponsorship and full time commitment to practice to even have a pray at being competitive.””




The time and practice thing is true of all sports. If you work at the sport 8 hours a day 5 days a week you will be better than someone that plays the sport every other weekend. In all participation sports don’t measure your self against the top pros but against other amateurs in your club.



“”For example look at the growing popularity of cowboy shooting in all of its forms. You can afford to buy the guns and there are clubs everywhere.””




It’s just the same; people with time to practise a lot do the wining and do it with comp spec guns. Plus most who take part do it for the dressing up. The shooting is a noisy interruption to the posing.



“”Another example would be the Ruger rim fire challenge. If they get behind it AND keep the super exotic guns out I think it will be hugely popular.””




Its not the gun the help you win as much as the time to practice hard. The full timer pro or rich amateur will almost always win