Page: 1

Muddling Through

Profile Information

Member since: Fri Jun 13, 2014, 07:54 AM
Number of posts: 17,990

Journal Archives

D.C. gun laws under scope: Judge to consider whether they are too restrictive

This should be interesting. Alan Gura has a pretty good track record so far.

"Gun owners who successfully sued the D.C. government to overturn the city’s ban on carrying firearms in public will argue in court Thursday that new laws to regulate concealed carry are unconstitutionally restrictive.

Attorney Alan Gura has said in court filings that the system put in place by the D.C. Council, which requires gun owners to show a need for self-defense in order to obtain a permit, is unreasonable and that a federal judge should bar enforcement of the law.


But the D.C. attorney general’s office, which has appealed the case, argues that because gun owners are challenging new laws they should file a new lawsuit.

“Plaintiffs’ motion raises new challenges to a new law. The relief plaintiffs seek is outside the scope of the existing judgment — now on appeal — and thus requires a new lawsuit,” wrote Eugene Adams, the city’s interim attorney general in court documents filed Tuesday."

I wonder how big the check will be this time?

Balance of article follows at link: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/nov/20/judge-to-consider-whether-gun-laws-are-too-restric/
Posted by Muddling Through | Thu Nov 20, 2014, 09:32 PM (3 replies)

The dangerous myth of heirarchy of lethality

http://dailycaller.com/2014/10/15/massad-ayoob-the-dangerous-myth-of-hierarchy-of-lethality/

Massad Ayoob

We live in a world where the entertainment media and the news media alike have demonized the firearm as a frightening, high-efficiency killing machine. A myth has arisen that I call “hierarchy of lethality.” It is the false belief that the firearm represents the nuclear level of hand-held weaponry, and is somehow more lethal than other deadly weapons.

The general public sees the knife as something less: after all, they’ll open their mail in the morning with something very much like your opponent’s knife, and will slice the roast at dinner tonight with something virtually identical to the blade your opponent wields.

Because it’s an accoutrement of everyday life, they just don’t see the knife as a weapon, even though they know cognitively that it can be turned from culinary aid to murder weapon in a heartbeat. An impact weapon, a “club?” Well, they may see that as even less deadly.

Now, the night comes when you are attacked by a homicidal perpetrator wielding bludgeon or blade. You are forced to shoot him in self-defense. I can almost guarantee where the subsequent attack on you is going to come from:

“He only had a knife!”


Balance of article follows at the link:

Something to ponder when considering self-defense. YMMV
Posted by Muddling Through | Sat Nov 8, 2014, 09:16 PM (16 replies)
Go to Page: 1