Decision in Kolbe!

[Doctor_M]

Ugg... made it through. I earned a Scotch when I get home.

 

[campns]

i dont think that was as bad as you guys think it was.

I don't disagree with you, I actually felt it was favorable, and that the state had more difficulty addressing the questions.

 

[shacklefordbanks]

I don't disagree with you, I actually felt it was favorable, and that the state had more difficulty addressing the questions.

A few grandstanding judges made is seem worse than it was. However, this is all show. The judges have already made up their minds via reviewing the record and their personal beliefs.

It does not matter what the outcome is, it's going to the Supreme Court. Both sides have too much invested. But I fear that there will not be a good Scalia replacement on the court by the time the circuit rules and then cert will be denied for lack of votes.

 

[Not_an_outlaw]

Why didn't the arbitrariness of the list come up anywhere in the arguments?

Also, the grandstanding judge is saying that Sweeny was arguing that the right is absolute. I don't see that. Seems like there are many current restrictions excluding the current MD law.

 

[shacklefordbanks]

She left the rails with that one.. So.. does MSI still want to piss away money on a HQL argument? These judges found a new fervor for states rights, and their legislators concerning firearms regulations.

I don't agree. I think MSI should go on. However I do think MSI is going about it all wrong. They have too many lawyers dancing in their heads trying to make a too complicated argument. Silly things like looking for clients that are poor and theoretically unable to afford the expense of the licensing requirements. Well they can afford the gun can't they, or it's only a couple of bucks related to paperwork will be the counter arguments and will just cloud the argument. They should just take an absolutest stance that even if the client is filthy rich, the law is an unconstitutional infringement on a right by demanding they spend any money to exercise that right. Like having to pay money for a license to comment on this forum. Just find an honorably discharged Army or Marine veteran without a criminal record and otherwise legally qualified for a handgun and go for the throat.

 

[mrgnstrn]

I know I'm behind you all on listening to this but.... I just got to this...

just look at "pictures" of weapons...as a means to classify if they are dangerous or not....

cripes...

what a crock of shit.

-m

 

[fred333]

How does this guy get to be a judge???

Ever watch hot dogs being made....

 

[shacklefordbanks]

Did I just hear that we can carry banned long-guns outside the home??

Yes. The carrying of long guns has always been legal. However if anyone freaks out and calls the cops they will likely arrest you and charge you with disorderly conduct unless you are out hunting on the eastern shore somewhere. Then you will spend a lot of money on lawyers.

 

[fred333]

I actually felt it was favorable, and that the state had more difficulty addressing the questions.

In the context of this....still believe that?

 

[Rack&Roll]

I just dropped this into the PBS thread, but worth repeating here:

Don't think it is any coincidence that last night's PBS Gun Control/Moms Demand Action TV Love Fest was aired THE NIGHT BEFORE KOLBE WAS TO BE ARGUED before the full 4th Circuit Court in Ricmond.

Judges watch TV too and this was right out of the Looney Left playbook. Disgusting.

 

[highli99]

I don't agree. I think MSI should go on. However I do think MSI is going about it all wrong. They have too many lawyers dancing in their heads trying to make a too complicated argument. Silly things like looking for clients that are poor and theoretically unable to afford the expense of the licensing requirements. Well they can afford the gun can't they, or it's only a couple of bucks related to paperwork will be the counter arguments and will just cloud the argument. They should just take an absolutest stance that even if the client is filthy rich, the law is an unconstitutional infringement on a right by demanding they spend any money to exercise that right. Like having to pay money for a license to comment on this forum. Just find an honorably discharged Army or Marine veteran without a criminal record and otherwise legally qualified for a handgun and go for the throat.

I think Larry Flint proved that the bill of rights applies to all law abiding citizens, regardless of how "worthy" or politically tasteful the person is.

 

[Boxcab]

Still hoping one of our legal experts will chime in on this when they are able...

It appears (to me anyways) that Appeal Judges tend to attack the side that they are planning to support. They have already reviewed the case, all of the submittals and previous hearing transcripts. They know the background and all of the details. They have already discussed this case between themselves. They already have made up their minds how they will vote. Their line of questions are looking for reasons that their formed opinion is wrong. It is one last chance to keep from mucking it up.

Based on that, we may be in good shape!

{The above is an informal impression I have formed following these cases. It is dangerous to jump to any real standard as each Judge is different.... But I would like to hear some input from our Legal Eagles to see if they notice any trends along this line}

.

 

[Bourbonstamps]

i ****ing hate liberals

 

[shootin the breeze]

i ****ing hate liberals

Pretty much sums it up.

 

[rockstarr]

i ****ing hate liberal communists

FIFY

 

[Jim12]

i ****ing hate liberals

They hated you first, and more.

 

[Matlack]

Funny I was listening to the oral arguments, and the attorney for Kolbe reminds me of Saul Goodman.

On a different note, it doesnt seem to have gone well for our side. I have no idea how it will end because they did give a hard time to the state when discussing strict scrutiny. I know thats what the case is about but they seemed friendly about the law itself.

 

[DC-W]

WBAL Report
http://www.wbal.com/article/162814/...n-appeals-hearing-on-maryland-gun-control-law

 

[fred333]

On a different note, it doesnt seem to have gone well for our side. I have no idea how it will end because they did give a hard time to the state when discussing strict scrutiny. I know thats what the case is about but they seemed friendly about the law itself.

Ultimately, as was evidenced by Blake's ruling, this ruling won't be based on anything beyond each judge's personal bias. I think the idea of ruling based on the Constitution is both outmoded and antithetical to the prevailing body politic. But I could be wrong (tho' I doubt it).

 

[campns]

In the context of this....still believe that?

I do, because of the argument that the legislature cannot deem what is/or is not a defensible firearm, common, or popular. And as the one judge had stated as most of the life of these firearms they remain in the home, one could draw the conclusion that they would be used for home defense if required.

The fact that MSR's are in the same realm that bolt actions and SA's were after the world wars, something that was once only for military purposes found a home for sporting reasons. you can look no further than the price lists for C&R collectors or other sale material for years, MILSURPS are kings of firearm sales.

The one judge pointed out that the same argument for the could be used for handguns and shotguns, which the state clearly does not want to do as they are "Common" or subjected to the "Heller" ruling.