[D]espite our best efforts, more people will die.Yeah, there's only one side to that equation, right, Mary Cheh? What secret knowledge are you holding back from us that makes you so authoritatively certain more lives won't be saved?
We'll see how well her ideal liberal academic framework of carry prohibitions, magazine capacity limits, microstamping, theft reporting requirements and other predator-favoring nonsense holds up when things fall apart and people get desperate.
I can just see Mary confronting the opportunistic and warning: "STAND BACK! I HAVE A LAW DEGREE!"
Oh, and as an aside: Kathie McLay, would you please put that sign down? Some would say you're making us look bad.
"The court said that the right to have handguns is not absolute" So, the court lied. It wasn't the first time, and won't be the last.
ReplyDeleteDC already has a workable "gun law": The 2nd Amendment (which means, in case they can't understand it: "Because a Very Effective, Armed, Population is Essential in order for America to stay Free and safe, the Absolute Right of Everyone to Own and to Carry any type of Weapon they choose, in any way they wish, anywhere they see fit, cannot be regulated, licensed, or even questioned in the smallest way!")
This "law" professor also referred to it as a "new" right? WTF. After the dam-ned lawyers get done with it, all we'll have left is our bare hands and good intentions.
ReplyDeleteFirst, even coming from a utilitarian ethic, more guns means less crime. Second, utilitarianism is an abhorrent doctrine. Is it morally right to grab an innocent person off the street, remove his kidneys, killing him, so that two other people in need of a transplant may live? No? Then shut the hell up gun phobes!
ReplyDeleteAmazing, how so many of these Constitutional liars, er *ahem* lawyers get the Constitution so wrong.
ReplyDeleteCrotalus- It isn't in their interest to get it right.
ReplyDeleteKent, why do you think I "Freudian slipped" and called them liars?
ReplyDeleteIt always amazes me that constitutional law professors are not required to be able to read to be granted the accolade of "expert".
ReplyDeleteI suppose the old adage is true. All it takes to be an expert is to be from out of town and the last to find out.