While it is doubtful that the Supreme Court decision will contain a long list of specifics in terms of regulation, their opinion should convey the Court's opinion quite clearly and should be broad enough to cover a variety of scenarios.Liberty Belles discusses some in this new article by Jennifer Freeman...
a nice well reasoned piece. Unfortunately one cannot reason a coward into courage or principle.
ReplyDeleteOne can only make them declare their pragmatism (cowardice). Pragmatism being the word they choose as camouflage.
But wait, isn't she a coward or turncoat or traitor for not arguing for the elimination of NFA, GCA, and such?
ReplyDeleteI think you might be getting pragmatic in your old age!
Oops, forgot to log into the correct profile.
ReplyDeleteShe didn't address them, which is a far better thing than saying "reasonable restrictions" on them is ok. Or did you just have a severe "Oh my God, that's me he described." moment.
ReplyDeleteShe didn't concede anything as a quid pro quo bribe. Perhaps you can see the logic in that, or not.
the silence in deafening.
ReplyDelete