Note to Dime, capitalization is a wonderful thing.
A good friend of mine, Tom Selgas, was on the team that argued Heller vs. DC, the landmark 2A case. He sent me the link to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding the Maryland ‘Assault Weapon’ ban.
The decision hinges on an interesting point, specifically:
We conclude — contrary to the now- vacated decision of our prior panel — that the banned assault weapons and large-capacity magazines are not protected by the Second Amendment. That is, we are convinced that the banned assault weapons and large-capacity magazines are among those arms that are “like” “M-16 rifles” — “weapons that are most useful in military service” — which the Heller Court singled out as being beyond the Second Amendment’s reach.
My friend introduced the link with this message:
This decision of the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals, which (if its logic were followed to the end) would justify the banning of all firearms under the Second Amendment.
The decision is typical boring tripe and even considers that no other court before it came to a similar conclusion. It seems progressive judges give emphasis to prior decisions when it fits their agenda, but less emphasis when they do not fit the agenda.



So does this end up with Diana Kennedy and the Supremes?
I guess so. I asked Tom some follow up questions. If he responds I will post them.
This is rather typical robe-speak. Make a law and the robes will “argue” it to its opposing POV.
Let’s recognize that 2A covers self-defense as generally accepted use in the times it was written. But the preamble has a point. It has been used in the past to justify things in the NFA 1934, that is silencers, short shotguns, etc.
Now suddenly the gross opposite of what the actual words say is held by the court. Military style weapons are now no longer “legal” despite NO EVIDENCE that there is a problem with them of their use. The total number of people killed by rifles is so phenomenally low, it is exceed IIRC by people killed with hammers.
The justices are protected from the public so that they would not fear for their jobs through their decisions. I am rapidly coming to the conclusion that was wrong. I know there are judges in my county who stand for vote to be kept on the bench. I make a point of voting AGAINST RETENTION for all I don’t have a personal knowledge of their uprightness. We ought to extend this to the whole bench. Or recall. Or SOMETHING.
This tyranny has to stop.
The majority criminally mischaracterizes US v. Miller.
It seems that is the point of this decision almost. To put it on record tearing down all that came before it to further an agenda.
Hadn’t really thought of it that way, but perhaps it’s a gauntlet to the SCOTUS. OTOH, if we get a solid right court, perhaps there will be a giant put-down.
Wouldn’t that be neat to watch!
I despise much of the federal judiciary.
Agree and may I emphasize capitalization is a wonderful thing.
Much of the federal judiciary should be despised, perhaps most of it.
I note that the gop now controls Congress and the executive branch.
What to do, what to do…
My suggestion- use that power to get a whole nother swarm of judges who can read the Constitution and respect it, swamping the leftists and rendering them irrelevant.
Elections have consequences.
That would require Congressional Republicans to do something conservative or grounded in Constitutional originalism. Things which are anathema to the majority of them.
I agree, they know the media would have a fit if they restructured the courts, and they are petrified of the media.
My God, when is the gop going to stop sniveling? How many elections do they have to win before they accept that they should notice that they control the government- and should act accordingly?
I’m sure they’re not really going to do what needs to be done- but can’t they at least break up the Ninth Circus?
Please??
But Trump isn’t. I keep saying they ought to abolish whole courts and then re-establish them in more rational ways.
AND maybe they ought to re-establish the old concept of jury nullification. It has never been removed; just judges were told they no longer had to inform juries of their duties.
Brent, do you believe in Capitalization Punishment?
Not only is capitalization a tool of patriarchal oppression, but the federal government has done precious little to deserve anyone taking the time to capitalize any letter, especially those that require hitting the “shift” key along with the actual letter key.
Build the Wall, cancer on the Potomac. Then I’ll capitalize the names of your failing institutions.
Not only is capitalization a tool of patriarchal oppression, but the federal government has done precious little to deserve anyone taking the time to capitalize any letter, especially those that require hitting the “shift” key along with the actual letter key.
Xey,
Are you saying Brent has a bad case of PO?
Probably. If I recall he flew some sort of manly jet plane for the army or something, so he’s probably quite patriarchal and oppressive and manly.
All are bad in our post-civilization civilization, so I intend to use capital letters only at a time and place of my choosing.
Take that, patriarchy.
You’re kidding, right?
Liz, the opening line of the OP was a joke about my lack of capitalization on my “bad kids” post title.
Xey, I read the memo. Brent flew for the texas national guard.
Especially in cases of puppet regimes.
Who wrote this for Brent? I have known him for a while. He is usually not this clever.
Dime, I can only get by on my dashing good looks for so long. Sooner or later I have to start using my astonishingly large IQ.
I’ll butt in right now and tell you I absolutely believe in capital punishment. People who rape and murder American citizens should not be allowed to further divert taxpayer dollars from supporting the good things; I speak specifically about the military.
The problem with capital punishment is that it needs to focus on DNA evidence and then pull the plug. Immediately. Yet it doesn’t and people live on Death Row for decades. This is hardly a deterrent because serious criminals don’t take it seriously.
Like so many things, capital punishment needs some better definition.
There are absolutely people who should be executed. Ted Bundy, John Wayne Gacy, Jeffrey Dahmer, just to name a few. Yes, it’s a mental illness, but one that has no reason to be tolerated or carried.
OTOH, there have been more than a few “convictions” of people who were simply mentally ill – and convenient. I know of at least one such case in Illinois where a young boy was convicted of killing his parents when in fact all he was was MR. He was to be executed, and that was just wrong.
DNA helps, but becoming too tied in to “tests” is a mistake. Medicine today is becoming overly reliant on images, and much as they are great, they are still prone to error – which is not considered. DNA is similar – a great additional test where there still has to be logic and rationale in deciding one guilty.
I agree that capital punishment is not to be taken lightly, but in order to become a true deterrent,there has to be a reasonable length of time allowed for appeals. At this point, stone cold killers of the Bundy, Gacy, Dahmer ilk can burden the justice system for decades. If this is the case, why have CP at all?
My true defense of capital punishment, however, rests upon my belief that serial murderers (and I would include rapists) pose a serious threat to prison officers not to mention their fellow convicts; in other words, they are a burden to every single element of society.
Sat for many years next to an LA prison guard while living in California and attending my nephews’ hockey games. He was a lovely person- big, bold, brash, and a kind father- but it was clear his job had certainly taken a toll. I mentioned that I had once dated a NYC narcotics detective and we became fast friends because I had had a glimpse of the type of hell those brave people face everyday.
I would hardly disagree that the current system is a travesty. OTOH, there is something to be said about not killing people unless it is necessary.
There are people that just need killing, as the line from The Deep South retirement says. The aforementioned miscreants are certainly in that category. OTOH, prison without parole is perhaps a worse type of purgatory, yet it allows for mistakes to be rectified. For that reason I believe CP should have very well subscribed limits. The crime should be neinous AND the guilt beyond ANY doubt.
Society has no requirement to maintain monsters, but it does have a requirement to demonstrate that the person in question really IS a monster.
“Society has no requirement to maintain monsters, but it does have a requirement to demonstrate that the person in question really IS a monster.”
The justice system does indeed accomplish what you have required and yet these criminals continue to burden society.
As an aside, I lived in Laguna Beach during the infamous OJ trial and I will never forget the impact of the verdict. He was a predator and finally went to jail, but it took too many taxpayer dollars to get there. I was delighted to be sitting next to and conversing with Drew Bledsoe on a plane during this time period and I will quote him directly:
“Every player in the NFL knew he was guilty.”
So you were a Pats fan before Brady?
“You’re kidding, right?”
Wasn’t that obvious?
In the case of Dime, capital punishment is in order. The decision was upheld in the lower case I mean court.
Right Angles, don’t make me go bold on you.
@MLR: Actually, I was a Giants fan at the time because I enjoyed watching LT. He was a magnificent example of excelling at what you do despite the personal aberrant behavior. He and Jordan shared not only specific skillsets but a unique will to win.