Kolbe v O'Malley being Appealed to CA4

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • ShafTed

    Ultimate Member
    Mar 21, 2013
    2,213
    Juuuuust over the line
    Are we out of the SCOTUS woods yet?

    Not by a long shot!

    All I can see from here is more trees!

    I posted this a while back in another thread, repeated here for your perusal.


    My opinion on SCOTUS as relates to 2A.

    Getting a "proper" replacement for Scalia will only return the SC to the previous status quo. That means there will be 4 hard-left liberals, 3 reasonably solid conservatives, and 2 squishies-in-the-middle: Roberts and Kennedy. I have heard some speculation that Kennedy in particular might have switched sides from Heller and McDonald and that is one reason for no cert on 2A cases, since no one knows which side Kennedy is on anymore. Pure guesswork on my part, seems feasible but worth exactly what you paid for it. Roberts' convoluted affirmation of Obama's health insurance disaster was an eye opener, I'm not so sure he can still be counted on for support of 2A.

    In order for the court to be at least somewhat safer for advancing 2A issues, we will need to also replace one or more of the hard lefties. Ginsberg will either retire or expire as she chooses, or maybe we can replace Breyer or Kennedy with a good, known-solid conservative. Then and only then will substantial progress be made.

    (Not on-topic for this discussion but still SC related, I would also like to see Thomas retire sometime soon so President Trump can replace him with someone who is the same only 30 years younger. This is another thing which will be a big step toward securing the SC long into the future.)

    Again, this is only my opinion, and worth exactly nothing in the grand scheme of things.

    I'm hoping somone (maybe Esq?) can PLEASE point out the error in my thinking.
     

    esqappellate

    President, MSI
    Feb 12, 2012
    7,407
    Not by a long shot!

    All I can see from here is more trees!

    I posted this a while back in another thread, repeated here for your perusal.




    I'm hoping somone (maybe Esq?) can PLEASE point out the error in my thinking.

    There is no error in suggestion that we need a replacement of one of the Court's liberals to really secure and extend Heller. I am not worried about Roberts (the Obamacare decision is really sui generis). Right now 3 justices are 78 or older (Breyer, Kennedy and Ginsburg) with Ginsburg the oldest at 83. I am hoping that Trump will be able to replace all three, but at least 2 of the three. And of course, no one knows who else -- nobody expected Justice Scalia to die so suddenly.
     

    ked0607

    Member
    Aug 25, 2012
    85
    PG CO
    For everyone complaining about Obama I love the slacker. He left 114 vacant seats in the federal court system. Hell some of them date back to 2010. :lol2:
     

    Mark75H

    MD Wear&Carry Instructor
    Industry Partner
    MDS Supporter
    Sep 25, 2011
    17,172
    Outside the Gates
    I read the Robinson decison as an upheld Terry Stop ... prohibited person in possession of a firearm.

    What at all would that have to do with Kolbe???
     

    danb

    dont be a dumbass
    Feb 24, 2013
    22,704
    google is your friend, I am not.
    I read the Robinson decison as an upheld Terry Stop ... prohibited person in possession of a firearm.

    What at all would that have to do with Kolbe???

    It's an enhancement.

    The police were called about a lawful activity.

    Robinson is only peripherally related to Kolbe. It's more 4th amendment. See here:

    Here is the petition for rehearing en banc that was granted. It will explain why they granted rehearing. This has a win for the government written all over it. The only question in my mind is how they write the opinion.

    I would not get your hopes up getting Robinson overturned.

    The danger justifying a protective frisk arises from the combination of a forced police encounter and the presence of a weapon, not from any illegality of the weapon’s possession.

    Encounters with the police can be contentious. I think that it's going to be hard to find 5 justices willing to disagree with the logic of a protective frisk.
     

    Brooklyn

    I stand with John Locke.
    Jan 20, 2013
    13,095
    Plan D? Not worth the hassle.
    It's an enhancement.

    The police were called about a lawful activity.

    No.. they were called based on the totality of the circumstances... Lawful conduct at a known drug location.


    Moreover the record of the case..Shows that the officer escalated the traffic stop based on a professional interpretation of the conduct and deportment of the detainee.

    It's not that much of a stretch under Terry.


    And it has no barring on cases absent these additional facts..

    It's not the end of the world in my opinion.

    But it does show why an optional permit system would be useful even in Constitutional Carry states.
     

    esqappellate

    President, MSI
    Feb 12, 2012
    7,407
    Robinson is only peripherally related to Kolbe. It's more 4th amendment. See here:



    I would not get your hopes up getting Robinson overturned.



    Encounters with the police can be contentious. I think that it's going to be hard to find 5 justices willing to disagree with the logic of a protective frisk.

    Agree on all points
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,921
    Messages
    7,258,988
    Members
    33,349
    Latest member
    christian04

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom