Skorpius Posted October 25, 2010 at 06:11 AM Share Posted October 25, 2010 at 06:11 AM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob Posted October 26, 2010 at 10:37 AM Share Posted October 26, 2010 at 10:37 AM It's kind of sad that he has to spend so much time fighting off the NRA's attempts to control the litigation. I understand that as an organization they feel they can't be allowed to become a bit player in the game, but more and more I am convinced the NRA is often as much about protecting the interests of the organization rather than the 2A and the interests of its members. I suspect that if the NRA cannot get its act together on this issue and start being more of a partner in the effort, that the NRA membership is going to turn on it, and not in a nice way. And that kind of thing can happen very quickly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beezil Posted October 26, 2010 at 05:20 PM Share Posted October 26, 2010 at 05:20 PM It's kind of sad that he has to spend so much time fighting off the NRA's attempts to control the litigation. I understand that as an organization they feel they can't be allowed to become a bit player in the game, but more and more I am convinced the NRA is often as much about protecting the interests of the organization rather than the 2A and the interests of its members. I suspect that if the NRA cannot get its act together on this issue and start being more of a partner in the effort, that the NRA membership is going to turn on it, and not in a nice way. And that kind of thing can happen very quickly. just my opinion, but i think Alan Gura should thank his lucky stars that Paul Clement was able to present an argument that i believe was more efficient and better received by SCOTUS. While technically and philosophically correct, I presonally believe Gura's approach was "lofty". Scalia went so far as to ridicule Gura by accusing him of "bucking for some place on a law school faculty". Gura is getting some deserved praise, but read the transcript a few times and ask yourself if you think Mr. Clement should be equally considered. I would go so far as to argue that Mr. Clement saved the case. Alan Gura acted a bit snooty and unprofessional in this presentation. He could have at the very least, acknowledged the efforts of the other gun advocacy groups. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mauserme Posted October 26, 2010 at 07:11 PM Share Posted October 26, 2010 at 07:11 PM Petitioner's brief did include both Privileges or Immunities and Due Process arguments, so I think his intent was originally to go for it all (P or I) while keeping Due Process as his safe bet. Seems like a change in tactic came about when NRA was given 1/3 of his time and, rather than duplicate what he knew would be a strictly Due Process argument on their part, he devoted his time to the other option. Even in the opening lines of the petition he states: http://www.chicagogu...2/08-1521ts.pdf QUESTION PRESENTEDWhether the Second Amendment right to keepand bear arms is incorporated as against the Statesby the Fourteenth Amendment's Privileges or Immunitiesor Due Process Clauses. It's hard to know what might have been if Gura had been able to keep his entire 30 minutes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tvandermyde Posted October 26, 2010 at 07:52 PM Share Posted October 26, 2010 at 07:52 PM It's hard to know what might have been if Gura had been able to keep his entire 30 minutes. Not really. more of the same. he didn't do that well in Heller and he didn't do that well in McDonald. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mauserme Posted October 26, 2010 at 08:31 PM Share Posted October 26, 2010 at 08:31 PM Not really. more of the same. he didn't do that well in Heller and he didn't do that well in McDonald.Yet he pushed to argue Heller before SCOTUS when NRA was originally opposed to the idea. And he won ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Federal Farmer Posted October 26, 2010 at 08:43 PM Share Posted October 26, 2010 at 08:43 PM Not really. more of the same. he didn't do that well in Heller and he didn't do that well in McDonald.Yet he pushed to argue Heller before SCOTUS when NRA was originally opposed to the idea. And he won ... Winning is a good measure of success. That said, and I have great respect for Mr. Gura, he does have an axe to grind against the NRA (with some justification). I think he takes it a bit too far. He won, he's the man, he should let it go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abolt243 Posted October 26, 2010 at 10:58 PM Share Posted October 26, 2010 at 10:58 PM Not really. more of the same. he didn't do that well in Heller and he didn't do that well in McDonald.Yet he pushed to argue Heller before SCOTUS when NRA was originally opposed to the idea. And he won ... Winning is a good measure of success. That said, and I have great respect for Mr. Gura, he does have an axe to grind against the NRA (with some justification). I think he takes it a bit too far. He won, he's the man, he should let it go. And so should those that would continue to beat a dead horse. AB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mauserme Posted October 27, 2010 at 03:27 AM Share Posted October 27, 2010 at 03:27 AM Judging from the applause Mr. Gura received when discussing the NRA-ILA "copyright", I'd say reports of the horse's demise have been exaggerated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.