Comments on: Sullivan Act Next? http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2008/03/17/sullivan-act-next/ Firearms Policy and Politics in Pennsylvania Sun, 21 Mar 2010 23:54:55 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Sebastian http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2008/03/17/sullivan-act-next/#comment-20495 Sebastian Wed, 19 Mar 2008 19:52:19 +0000 http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2008/03/17/sullivan-act-next/#comment-20495 Feel free to come up to the media room and meet everyone. Did you register as a reader with the blog bash? There are percs. Feel free to come up to the media room and meet everyone. Did you register as a reader with the blog bash? There are percs.

]]> By: ParatrooperJJ http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2008/03/17/sullivan-act-next/#comment-20494 ParatrooperJJ Wed, 19 Mar 2008 19:45:51 +0000 http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2008/03/17/sullivan-act-next/#comment-20494 Maybe we should get together and chat at the NRA convention. Maybe we should get together and chat at the NRA convention.

]]> By: Sebastian http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2008/03/17/sullivan-act-next/#comment-20369 Sebastian Tue, 18 Mar 2008 14:01:16 +0000 http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2008/03/17/sullivan-act-next/#comment-20369 Unfortunately, we're probably going to get challenges to the NFA whether we want them or not. Because this is a criminal matter, we're not going to have the luxury the civil rights movement did, of being able to carefully pick our strategy. A defense attorney will take a case forward, and will lose. The hope is that they won't lose in every single federal circuit. Either way, the ideal move would be to use the court strategy to shore up your defenses. Even if we freeze the status quo in place, that's not too bad a result. If you don't have to worry so much about losing ground, you can take a considerably more offensive stance legislatively, and you'll want the issue to be controversial before you bring it before The Court. Unfortunately, we’re probably going to get challenges to the NFA whether we want them or not. Because this is a criminal matter, we’re not going to have the luxury the civil rights movement did, of being able to carefully pick our strategy. A defense attorney will take a case forward, and will lose. The hope is that they won’t lose in every single federal circuit.

Either way, the ideal move would be to use the court strategy to shore up your defenses. Even if we freeze the status quo in place, that’s not too bad a result. If you don’t have to worry so much about losing ground, you can take a considerably more offensive stance legislatively, and you’ll want the issue to be controversial before you bring it before The Court.

]]> By: Joe Huffman http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2008/03/17/sullivan-act-next/#comment-20367 Joe Huffman Tue, 18 Mar 2008 13:56:33 +0000 http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2008/03/17/sullivan-act-next/#comment-20367 I've been quietly asking people to not even whisper about challenging NFA toys. Sebastian is right. I’ve been quietly asking people to not even whisper about challenging NFA toys. Sebastian is right.

]]> By: Sebastian http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2008/03/17/sullivan-act-next/#comment-20363 Sebastian Tue, 18 Mar 2008 13:39:21 +0000 http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2008/03/17/sullivan-act-next/#comment-20363 The 1986 machine gun ban would be among the last things you'd want to challenge. You want a good body of law built up before you do that. The Courts are going to be very prejudiced to the idea of machine gun rights, and you want them to have a little wiggle room for shenanigans as possible. The 1986 machine gun ban would be among the last things you’d want to challenge. You want a good body of law built up before you do that. The Courts are going to be very prejudiced to the idea of machine gun rights, and you want them to have a little wiggle room for shenanigans as possible.

]]> By: ParatrooperJJ http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2008/03/17/sullivan-act-next/#comment-20362 ParatrooperJJ Tue, 18 Mar 2008 13:32:56 +0000 http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2008/03/17/sullivan-act-next/#comment-20362 Incorporation would be a good bet for the next major case. So would the 1986 machine gun ban. Incorporation would be a good bet for the next major case. So would the 1986 machine gun ban.

]]> By: Justin Buist » Blog Archive » On Heller http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2008/03/17/sullivan-act-next/#comment-20352 Justin Buist » Blog Archive » On Heller Tue, 18 Mar 2008 04:12:59 +0000 http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2008/03/17/sullivan-act-next/#comment-20352 [...] going to see a number legal battles related to the 2nd amendment in short order. I read that Bob Levy wants to after the 1911 NYC Sullivan Act next. That’d be a good way to take on the incorporation issue that isn’t going to be [...] [...] going to see a number legal battles related to the 2nd amendment in short order. I read that Bob Levy wants to after the 1911 NYC Sullivan Act next. That’d be a good way to take on the incorporation issue that isn’t going to be [...]

]]> By: Regolith http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2008/03/17/sullivan-act-next/#comment-20346 Regolith Tue, 18 Mar 2008 01:19:35 +0000 http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2008/03/17/sullivan-act-next/#comment-20346 He was talking to The Sun, which is a New York City newspaper, so he was probably just mentioning NYC's gun laws as an example that the reporter would be familiar. I.E. he was targeting his response to the audience. My guess is Chicago is still next. He was talking to The Sun, which is a New York City newspaper, so he was probably just mentioning NYC’s gun laws as an example that the reporter would be familiar. I.E. he was targeting his response to the audience. My guess is Chicago is still next.

]]> By: kaveman308 http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2008/03/17/sullivan-act-next/#comment-20335 kaveman308 Mon, 17 Mar 2008 21:43:28 +0000 http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2008/03/17/sullivan-act-next/#comment-20335 Either way, if it's NY or Illinois, the democratic contenders aren't going to be able to hide their true feelings for long. Either way, if it’s NY or Illinois, the democratic contenders aren’t going to be able to hide their true feelings for long.

]]> By: Joe Huffman http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2008/03/17/sullivan-act-next/#comment-20332 Joe Huffman Mon, 17 Mar 2008 21:11:13 +0000 http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2008/03/17/sullivan-act-next/#comment-20332 Sebastian, I agree with you. We should use the very small increments as we expand the scope. +1 on Levy not saying "New York in next". Just that it <em>will</em> be challenged. Sebastian, I agree with you. We should use the very small increments as we expand the scope.

+1 on Levy not saying “New York in next”. Just that it will be challenged.

]]> By: Rob K http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2008/03/17/sullivan-act-next/#comment-20330 Rob K Mon, 17 Mar 2008 20:33:09 +0000 http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2008/03/17/sullivan-act-next/#comment-20330 er.. "he was just saying..." Durn fingers... er.. “he was just saying…”

Durn fingers…

]]> By: Rob K http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2008/03/17/sullivan-act-next/#comment-20329 Rob K Mon, 17 Mar 2008 20:32:11 +0000 http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2008/03/17/sullivan-act-next/#comment-20329 The article goes on to say: <i>Mr. Levy, who has financed Mr. Heller's suit, said he currently has no plan to bring a similar suit challenging New York City's gun regulations.</i> I think we was just saying that it would happen eventually, not what his next step was. The article goes on to say: Mr. Levy, who has financed Mr. Heller’s suit, said he currently has no plan to bring a similar suit challenging New York City’s gun regulations.

I think we was just saying that it would happen eventually, not what his next step was.

]]>