Oral Arguments in Incorporation Case

Randy Barnett has a link to the arguments, along with some commentary, in the appeal of the Chicago case to incorporate the Second Amendment.   Doesn’t sound like it went all that well.

2 Responses to “Oral Arguments in Incorporation Case”

  1. Ken says:

    Posner is the very definition of an intellectual lightweight. He makes his decisions based on personal prejudice; he ignores–not refutes, ignores–major intellectual movements that disagree with him; he constructs straw-men (such as when he claims that conservative justices are being “activist” and therefore hypocritical–never mind that they are following the clear letter of the law, whether activist or not); and he invents his own school of thought (“loose originalism”) when the facts don’t support him.

    He ought to retire and go to an old folks’ home as soon as possible.

  2. Ken says:

    Posner seems totally unaware that the Republicans of the Reconstruction were supporting the RKBA as a means for freedmen to defend themselves. He seems utterly surprised that anyone outside the South would have supported gun rights in 1868, even though a simple Google search for various keywords, such as freedmen, gun control, Fourteenth Amendment, Jim Crow, and Reconstruction would tell him otherwise.

    His peanut-sized brain is utterly closed to the idea that anyone other than redneck hicks have ever owned firearms. I seriously wonder if he’s read ANYTHING from the other side. It’s as if he’s trapped in a mid-90’s time warp.

    Dumbest. Judge. Ever.


  1. Never figured a Court would say this « Cemetery’s Gun Blob - [...] More about this case over at Volokh Conspiracy (h/t to SiH).  Ain’t soundin’ too [...]