Snowflakes in Hell

… only out oh hell, when they do that it means society is coming apart at the seams.  The British people need to stand up and take their individuality back from the state, or it’ll be over from them.

Ahab goes from Canada to China.

… old enough to buy a beer, is what I say.   But Obama doesn’t think so.

He’s been commenting on gun blogs so much, maybe I can start a regular feature:

I do not describe the regulars who read a blog named the “The Bitch Girls” to be the AHSA target market. I think it should be clear from my comments here and on other “whacko” blogs that AHSA is reaching out to a more educated, sophisticated and straight thinking hunter and shooter demographic. Unfortunately, a “bitter” female with a gun and a chip on her shoulder probably would not find AHSA’s message of civic responsibility much to her liking.

He means a target market he hopes is smart enough, educated enough, and sophisticated enough not to notice who leaders in his organization like to hang out with?

From Clayton:

It does not sound to me like those who are going to vote against us would have felt differently, even if we had used a time machine to bring James Madison into the courtroom to explain our position.

Found here.  Unfortunately, Clayton didn’t manage to get inside, but I heard that Bitter was able to get him in front of the media cameras a few times, which is good.  Alan Gura managed to use one of Clayton’s discoveries during the oral argument phase.  Good show.

From Dave Hardy:

I think EVERYONE associated with this case who knows anything about appellate argument — and I’ve talked to many in that class — agreed that if you cannot come up with a 2nd Amendment test that lets the government do a lot of things with full autos, you lose. That’s bottom line. You can have a second amendment for things other than full auto, or you can have no second amendment. Take your pick, there is no third alternative. Life isn’t fair. I was very relieved when the Court showed signs of taking the view that Heller is asking to own a .38, not a Thompson, so we can deal with the full auto issue if and when someone brings a case (which I hope will be about ten years down the road).

I think ragging on Gura for this is not very productive.  The guy just, in all likelihood, won a case that gives us a second amendment that means something.  I was not happy that so much of the oral arguments focused on machine guns, but what are you going to do? He was the one up there, and not us.  It’s a lot easier to think “He probably could have answered that question without mentioning machine guns” when you’re sitting there listening rather than on the spot being grilled by justices in the highest court in the land.

That said, I’ll leave the comments open for folks who want to outline ideas for how to make the distinction between arms that are protected by the second amendment, and arms that aren’t, that meet the standard laid out by Dave above.

Radley Balko has a new article on the Chesapeake drug raid that went horribly wrong.  I think I blogged about that a few months ago when it first happened.

Well folks, it looks pretty good that we’re going to win on Heller.  If I were a betting man, I’d put money on it.  Not a guarantee, but the odds look pretty good.  But go back and listen to the oral arguments; who are the justices that most are supporting us in the questioning?

1. Justice Scalia - Appointed by Ronald Reagan
2. Justice Thomas - Appointed by George H.W. Bush
3. Justice Alito - Appointed by George W. Bush
4. Justice Roberts - Appointed by George W. Bush
5. Justice Kennedy - Appointed by Ronald Reagan

This should give you all some idea of the importance of elections.  Where do you think we’d be on the Heller case if Al Gore or John Kerry had won in 2000 and 2004 respectively?  Given that none of these justices seemed to express support for a really robust second amendment right in the quesetioning, at least one that would make all of us happy, how do you think the right will be constructed in subsequent cases before The Court if we just let Obama or Hillary select the next two, possibly three justices to put on the high court?

For all my complaints about George W. Bush on the gun issue, and despite my blief that Bush is hardly to be considered a conservative, we would not be looking at a very strong possibility of winning this case if gun owners had not put him in the oval office in 2000/2004.  We actually need a stronger court, not just at the Supreme Court level, but at the circuit court level too, for the cases which will inevitably be fought after this.  I think Heller will be decided narrowly.   If we want to fight the next battles and win, and avoid getting an individual right without meaning, we need to make sure McCain is in the oval office in 2008.

As all gun owners know, .50 BMG rounds with micronucular warheads have been strictly regulated under federal law since 1994.  They are unavailable to civilians.  The VPC greatly exaggerates the danger of this threat.

Peter Hamm is looking a little angry these days.  I’m pretty sure Justice Kennedy didn’t help his mood any after it was all over.  I think in this picture he was confronting some of our megaphone wielding bozos who were provoking a confrontation outside of the Courthouse.  Petey got angry, but to the best of my knowledge, he didn’t threaten to shoot any of them.

Note to pro-gun activists: Leave the megaphones at home.  We’re not dirty hippy protestors.  You don’t want to be a hippy, do you?  The object of rallying like that is to get your happy, smiling, articulate face in front of the media.  Megaphone amplified anger doesn’t persuade people, and persuading people is the object of the game.