This is a placeholder for now because I have not had ads on this blog for years. In case I ever start up again, this will be the policy in effect:
The FTC has some fool nonsense rules about ads on blogs or some such and presumes authority over the First Amendment to compel the unfunded mandate that we who earn ad revenues make some kind of disclosure so you don't think we're getting paid to say nice things about people or God knows what, meaning they must think you're stupid, too. I have had a few ads on this site in the past and may do so again if I think it's worth a try. Combined, I probably couldn't buy a box of good cigars each year, let alone a bottle of George T. Stagg, and that is somehow supposed to compromise my morality to force me to say nice things about products and services I don't mean simply in exchange for filthy lucre. If you believe that, leave now--you're not smart enough to be here. Bottom line, aside from welcoming a sponsor, I will do no posts related to their products or services, or reviews of what they offer.
About "The Only Ones"
The purpose of this feature has never been to bash cops. The only reason I do this is to amass a credible body of evidence to present when those who would deny our right to keep and bear arms use the argument that only government enforcers are professional and trained enough to do so safely and responsibly. And it's also used to illustrate when those of official status, rank or privilege, both in law enforcement and in some other government position, get special breaks not available to we commoners, particularly (but not exclusively) when they're involved in gun-related incidents.
Comment House Rules
Keep them on topic. No spam. No threats against anyone except me. Do not feed trolls--I'll take out the trash. Try to keep it clean. I'm the final arbiter. If you don't like the rules, start your own damn blog.
Link Policy
WarOnGuns reciprocates links with liberty-oriented sites promoting the right to keep and bear arms for all peaceable individuals. If you have linked to me and don't see your site below, it's probably just because I haven't noticed it yet. Shoot me an email via the "Contact Form" (see above in this sidebar) if you want to fix that.
As a general rule I remove links for blogs that have been inactive for over one year.
I think the Supreme Court will do what they usually do when met with a hot issue such as this, make a very narrow ruling that answers the details of the specific case, but says little or nothing about the general concept of the right of the people to keep and bear arms.
Hmmm. Congress has legal jurisdiction over DC, doesn't it? Ideally, we'd love to see SCOTUS side with the individual-rights interpretation; but realistically, SCOTUS denying cert and dropping this political hot potato right back in Congress's lap might actually be the best outcome we could hope for. Consider: not wanting to handle this hot potato, SCOTUS denies cert; thus, the lower court's decision stands as precedent (even if it isn't, then at least DC is free[r]), and the Democrat-controlled Congress now has to deal with the twin problems of DC-citizens' guns suddenly being legal in Congress's own backyard, and of crafting a local UPD law which will withstand a court challenge. (Oh, and I almost forgot: "packing" the lower court with judges who think the "right" way so this embarrassment/failure to stay "on mission" doesn't happen again).
2 comments:
I think the Supreme Court will do what they usually do when met with a hot issue such as this, make a very narrow ruling that answers the details of the specific case, but says little or nothing about the general concept of the right of the people to keep and bear arms.
Hmmm. Congress has legal jurisdiction over DC, doesn't it? Ideally, we'd love to see SCOTUS side with the individual-rights interpretation; but realistically, SCOTUS denying cert and dropping this political hot potato right back in Congress's lap might actually be the best outcome we could hope for. Consider: not wanting to handle this hot potato, SCOTUS denies cert; thus, the lower court's decision stands as precedent (even if it isn't, then at least DC is free[r]), and the Democrat-controlled Congress now has to deal with the twin problems of DC-citizens' guns suddenly being legal in Congress's own backyard, and of crafting a local UPD law which will withstand a court challenge. (Oh, and I almost forgot: "packing" the lower court with judges who think the "right" way so this embarrassment/failure to stay "on mission" doesn't happen again).
Mark Odell
Post a Comment