It is difficult to fight the government. There are often huge hurdles to overcome. When the system is working as designed, there are reasonable paths for movement toward correcting wrongs done by our government.
Taking a case all the way to the Supreme Court and arguing it will cost several million dollars. The net says that just getting a DC Lawyer to file for certiorari will run $100,000 to $250,000. That’s the cheap part.
For decades we lacked the tools to fight gun control laws. The system was weighed against us. If there was a state with an egregious gun control law it was unlikely to have courts that were far out of line with that state’s ideals. You find more leftist judges in leftist states.
FOr years the Ninth Circus Court was known for refusing to give standing to anybody regarding Second Amendment claims. The same was true in the Second Circuit Court and a few others. In addition there were many cases where when the state lost they would make a decision not to appeal in order to keep the case out of the hands of the Supreme Court.
It was better to take a lose in regards to one individual than to potentially lose everything.
We saw this in NYSR&PA v. New York City when the city and state jumped through flaming hoops in order to get the case mooted before SCOTUS could rule. Something about in the days before SCOTUS granted certiorari the city and state were arguing that if their regulation was overturned people would die and that it was absolutely necessary to keep the rule in place to save lives.
When SCOTUS granted certiorari NYC changed their rule and claimed the case was moot. NYS then got a law passed that said that the rule could not be reintroduced by NYC. This didn’t mean that the state couldn’t reintroduce the rule as law, just that NC couldn’t.
Monday the rule saved lives. Tuesday it wasn’t really necessary and so it is struck and the state is forbiddening the city from every implementing that rule again.
Before Heller it was all about “you aren’t a part of the militia, no standing” after Heller it became Miller allows some gun rights to be infringed based on type of weapon.
Bruen brought us a huge win. It gave us a tool to wield against overreaching government tyrants.
When Illinois filed their latest infringements they expected a little push back. What they got instead was an avalanche of suits filed against them.
Most of these cases are not destined for the Supreme Court. They will either be folded into other similar cases as they move up the system or the plaintiffs(Good guys) will drop out of the fight once it gets to expensive.
With Bruen in their arsenal, even a week lawyer can make a good claim against many aspects of the Illinois gun controll bills.
The state has to defend against them all, strenuously. If the gun rights team gets even one win at the district or state lower court, it gives more weight to other cases challenging the law. When you read Suddaby quoting Sinatra Jr quoting Suddaby you can see how this all works.
Of course the gun rights infringers have the same tired arguments.
Gun-rights groups refused to negotiate the measure when it was being discussed in subject matter hearings at the Illinois statehouse late last year and earlier this month.
Why would anybody be negotiating at this point with gun rights infringers?
After a multi day argument in social media my opinion got tired and lashed out “Well what law would you propose to fix the problem!!!?” he yelled in text. I quoted the Second back to him. He shut up.
Walk into a business and head over to HR. Start negotiating for your salary. They will show you to the door. They didn’t want to hire you. They don’t want you. There is nothing to negotiate.
Their negotiation is always “We are going to take all of this from you. If you promise to be quiet we won’t take as much.” Nope. I don’t agree to the deal.
[visual-link-preview encoded=”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″]
Comments
5 responses to “Unintended Consequences: Illinois gun ban”
They refused to ‘negotiate’ because they new that the Dems have a veto proof super majority in both houses so there was no point. They just sat back and let them pack it w/ every unconstitutional /unenforceable/ nonsensical piece of garbage they could think of with the plan to take it to court and squash it once and for all.
And the dems accommodated.
So now we get to see what comes of it. .
“Their negotiation is always “We are going to take all of this from you. If you promise to be quiet we won’t take as much.” Nope. I don’t agree to the deal.”
Most, if not all, “compromises” between banners and owners end like this. That is one of my big beefs with the NRA. They frequently play “It would have been worse” card, with no real way for individuals to certain the real story.
In a negotiation, ending in compromise, both sides get what they want.
.
When “negotiating” with gun grabbers, they never offer anything we want, ever. So what we’re “negotiating” is how much infringement they’ll try to do now, vs. how much they’ll try to do later on.
.
I think a lot of people on the pro-gun side – individuals, store owners, industry people, even some politicians – have realized this and have had enough of it. At least, that’s my fervent hope.
Why would anybody be negotiating at this point with gun rights infringers?
But, we always do. Every time.
The problem is the gun grabbers will only hear their side of the conversation. Never yours.
.
How many times has a high level politician said “we need to have a conversation about guns” Dozens, hundreds? It does not matter. Unless you are agreeing with them, the “conversation” did not happen. Same thing in Illinois. When they say the gun rights groups refused to negotiate, what really happened is the gun rights groups disagreed with what they legislature already decided to do.
This will be interesting to see play out. I think this is another experiment to see what the grabbers can get away with. If the grabbers win we will see copy cat laws pushed everywhere…. Meanwhile We the People continue to set NICS records….