Typhonis
Well-known member
The more and more you try to exert control, the less control you actually have.
Gun Political Issues Megathread. (Control for or Against?)
- Thread starter Free-Stater 101
- Start date
If you believe this was an accident, you're an idiot and a tool.
Two Lawyers Who Successfully Argued the Gun Rights Case before the US Supreme Court Were Released from Their Law Firm Chicago-based Kirkland & Ellis because that Law Firm Decided Not to Pursue Second Amendment Related Legislation Anymore and Informed their Two Attorneys, Former Solicitor General Paul Clement and Erin Murphy, a regular Supreme Court litigator, that they would have to abandon their current Clients and withdraw from those ongoing cases.
Both of the Attorney's refused and decided to found their own Law Firm.
www.politico.com
Both of the Attorney's refused and decided to found their own Law Firm.
Politico said:
Firm splits with lawyers who won gun rights case at Supreme Court
The exit follows a decision by Kirkland & Ellis to drop Second Amendment litigation.
www.politico.com
Two Lawyers Who Successfully Argued the Gun Rights Case before the US Supreme Court Were Released from Their Law Firm Chicago-based Kirkland & Ellis because that Law Firm Decided Not to Pursue Second Amendment Related Legislation Anymore and Informed their Two Attorneys, Former Solicitor General Paul Clement and Erin Murphy, a regular Supreme Court litigator, that they would have to abandon their current Clients and withdraw from those ongoing cases.
Both of the Attorney's refused and decided to found their own Law Firm.
Firm splits with lawyers who won gun rights case at Supreme Court
The exit follows a decision by Kirkland & Ellis to drop Second Amendment litigation.
integrity isn't always an easy thing to have these men however have my respect.
Good for them!
Here's some evidence that's it's just shit policy:
Article: From the Supreme Court's decision in Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Bonta (2021) (which began at the trial court as Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Harris):
I'm pretty sure that was intentional failure of design.
For anyone looking for a layman's explanation of Red Flag Laws, here you go:
Typhonis
Well-known member
Again I feel we need to disarm the police. Why do they need combat armor and assault rifles to do their job? I mean that picture looks more like a military exercise than a police operation. Destroy 2am no knock warrants while you are at it. There are easier ways to catch criminals.
Because look at the Miami diade fbi shootout and the birth Hollywood shootout...
Wargamer08
Well-known member
Price of doing business. Police should not be able to double as paramilitary units.
Last time that happened major shootouts.
Because criminals can have all that stuff too, and some even do get that kind of stuff (see: cartels, certain crazies). And even if they didn't, police doesn't exist to give criminals a fair fight, but to crush them with, ideally, no losses.
As this very issue demonstrates, the real issues lie on the borderline of legal system and politics, not what hardware cops carry and the optics of it.
Doomsought
Well-known member
That is what the militia is for.
Back to the legal/politics system. Try that and see what the legal system and politicians make out of you.
Doomsought
Well-known member
That is how it worked in the United States for two and a half centuries.
It made it significantly harder for the government to start a shootout. That is the whole reason they invented swat, they didn't like how many checks they needed to go through when they had to call in the militia, and sold it to the public on the basis of response time.
Besides the wild west when has a militia ever been used to fight crime?
Umm, no?
Was the proverbial wild west sheriff ever forbidden from using any gun or armor he wished and could afford?
The problem is that the government has increasingly diverse ways to ruin you with decreasing accountability and conditions limiting their use, not that the police has tools for that one particular old way.