Legal Victory Celebrations for Anti-Gunners

I had to take a look at the list of 13 “Victories” for the Brady Campaign of 2013, and I do find their standards of declaring victory to be somewhat entertaining.

In one case, they celebrate not being forced to own guns. In another situation, victory is filing a lawsuit. In several cited cases, it’s they didn’t file anything other an amicus brief. In another, they call a case they lost a victory because they are trying appeal.

While I won’t pretend that all of their victories aren’t actually victories for their cause, I will say that I hope we can make their 14 victories in 2014 look a little more like the examples I highlighted. “We showed up for work – Victory!” “The computer to type the fundraising email still works – Victory!” “We lost a case that can scare our supporters into giving money – Victory!”

6 Responses to “Legal Victory Celebrations for Anti-Gunners”

  1. The ruling in Nelson, GA regarding statutes making gun ownership mandatory seems sketchy.

    It seems that there is a long history and tradition of mandating arms ownership.

    The Constitution expressly reserves some of these powers to the State:

    To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

    To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

    I guess I’d have to read the decision. The biggest issue is probably that the ordnance was a local one, not a state law.

    • Dep801 says:

      Kennesaw,GA has had an ordinance for years (since 1982) requiring each household within the city limits to maintain a firearm. The difference between Nelson and Kennesw is the provision in Kennesaw’s law that exempts conscientious objectors, which was added as a result of an ALCU court challenge. The law has never been enforced, and contains other exemptions, as does Nelson’s, which makes it impractical to do so. Kennesaw passed their law in response to Morton Grove,Ill banning guns in that city. Both Kennesaw and Nelson are in Cherokee county, a suburb of Atlanta.

  2. Oh, and regarding Brady’s claim…

    ALASKA SUPREME COURT HOLDS GUN DEALER CAN BE LIABLE FOR FATAL SHOOTING! We argued this case on behalf of Simone Kim, who was shot and killed by a drug-addicted fugitive who got his gun from a negligent Juneau gun dealer. In a first-of-its-kind case in Alaska, the Supreme Court held the dealer can be held liable. (Kim v. Coxe)

    This was about the Protection in Lawful Commerce Act shielding an FFL from liability after a customer stole a gun and shot someone with it.

    The Alaska Supreme Court remanded the case back to the appeals court due to issues with some of hte evidence. They upheld the PLCAA.

    We affirm the superior court’s ruling that the PLCAA is constitutional and its interpretation of the PLCAA, but because it is unclear whether certain evidence before the superior court actually was or should have been considered when granting summary judgment dismissing the Estate’s claims, we vacate the summary judgment ruling and remand for further consideration.

    Basically, all the AK Court said was is, “The PLCAA is legit. Summary judgement in this case, however was not appropriate. The lower courts need to take a closer look at the issues before ruling on this particular case.” It does not in any way undermine the PLCAA. So I guess the Brady folks are kind of correct, in a certain way, if you consider that the appeals court COULD theoretically find differently now that the case has been remanded. It is kind of a fishy claim, though. Probably worthy of a Pinocchio Nose or two.

    Then again we’re dealing with pathological liars here.

  3. KevinC says:

    Doesn’t surprise me, everyone gets or gives an award these days. We have a President who won a Nobel Peace Prize for the dubious honor of Not Being George Bush. I myself am Time’s Person Of The Year for 2006. I’m surprised they didn’t take credit for yesterday’s sunrise…

  4. mikee says:

    How long, and how much money, will it take to repeal the laws in CO & NY & NJ & CT passed in 2013?

    If those weren’t victories for anti-gunners, there is something funny going on with the definition of victories.

  5. Cymond says:

    “In another landmark decision, the New York Appellate Division held that the manufacturer, distributor and dealer can all be held responsible for supplying the traffickers. (Williams v. Beemiller)”

    Seriously?? How can the manufacturer be held liable for something done by someone else who is separated by several steps from the manufacturer?


  1. SayUncle » “Victories” for the Brady Campaign - […] Their definition of victory seems a little lacking. […]