search
top

A Win on Possession of Firearms Outside of Home

A District Court rules that it may be a constitutionally protected right.  Go read the circumstances.  It’s truly appalling.

6 Responses to “A Win on Possession of Firearms Outside of Home”

  1. Alan says:

    So the cops were wrong even if he had a gun, which he didn’t.

    That is an appalling story, but doesn’t worse happen every day and we never hear about it?

  2. nosmo says:

    Another line in the sand erased! Thank G-d for the 3% Glad that they put the fear of retribution into that damn court eh?

    Damn shame that it we needed the 3% to get that decision.

    !97!

  3. Sebastian says:

    nosmo: get the signature right. It’s this:

    XCVII

  4. Tom says:

    Uh, just WHAT did the .000097% have to do with this case?

    Wasn’t it Sebastian just yesterday bemoaning the Hain case?

  5. The Obscurotron says:

    Too bad this supporting statement is in a footnote and is dicta. Eventually a better case will come along, i.e. one where the person is actually open carrying and doing so lawfully which will hopefully settle the matter of us in a more positive light.

  6. Jake says:

    “Too bad this supporting statement is in a footnote and is dicta.”

    It’s also in a District Court. It’s not binding on any other court, and – even if it wasn’t dicta – not even truly binding on the court it came from.

top