Friday Feedback

It feels like it has been a long week. I think much of that came from listening for hours of oral arguments. On the better side of things, I believe that I have better code in place to make the task easier next time. I’ve also created tools that do more saves along the way so that I don’t have to redo everything, over and over again.

J. Kb. contacted me to ask, “what was the request about what ammo?” I hope he has an article on 5.7×28 coming up. Having watched a number of YouTube videos about it, I’m curious, but not curious enough to invest in still another caliber.

It looks like there will be some photographs of squirrel processing coming up soon. I want to make sure that I take many photos.

We had a visitor staying with us for a short time. I managed to foist off my Nikon D5500. He had a great time with the lens I let him borrow, but he wasn’t allowed to take that with him. I’m looking forward to seeing what he does with that camera once he picks up a couple of lenses for it.

Having spent today thinking about what I heard in the 7th Circuit Court oral arguments, I think I’ve identified why it was so difficult.

  • The two anti-gun judges were actually rude. Easterbrook made disparaging sighs and other sounds while the good guys were presenting.
  • The Judges were disrespectful to the Bruen court. They actually laughed at some of the phrasing from Justice Thomas’ opinion
  • Judge Wood constantly played dumb, claiming that figuring out what the words of the Second Amendment actually meant was going to be their task, even though the Heller court told them what the words mean.
  • Judge Easterbrook was demanding that the good guys argue against the NFA instead of the actual laws. Sort of: If we decide that an AW/LCM ban is unconstitutional, what’s to keep you from arguing that the NFA is unconstitutional?
  • The Circuit Court represents more than just the state of Illinois. Yet Easterbrook and Wood kept repeating that machine guns and grenades are banned. Machine guns are banned in Illinois, but not in every state under the 7th Circuit.
  • Easterbrook wanted to find some “special” meaning in “in common use today”. He refused to use plain text.

I expected the state to misrepresent the situation. I expected them to make their best arguments, even if they had to make huge reaches. They did not disappoint in that regard. It was just how down right disrespectful Easterbrook and Wood were to the Bruen Court, Murphy and Maag. It was not a good look.


Was the breakdown of the oral arguments worthwhile to you? Is it worth my time to do other oral arguments when they come out?

Other than a Ruger PC9, is there another 9 mm carbine that you like?

Bevis v. Naperville (7th Cir.) oral arguments, analysis


B.L.U.F. An examination of how judges act and how to read the tea-leaves. Also, the sorts of ridiculous things that are said and don’t get rebutted.


The head judge is Frank Easterbrook. He has a history of dumping on the Second Amendment at every chance he can. He is the judge who got means-end into the 7th circuit court.

All quotes are from the machine created transcript, with edits by me. I will only be adding the speaker to the quotes.

present argument on issues raised in their briefing, such as historical analogs like gunpowder restrictions and other issues related to the scope of the Second Amendment. — Hunger

Here we see that she is off to a great start, banning modern sporting rifles and standard capacity magazines is exactly like fire codes from the founding era.

We know from Bruen that courts must begin by assessing whether the regulated instrument is protected by the plain text of the Second Amendment — Hunger. Nope, it is if the conduct is protected by the plain text. She is twisting words here.

The instruments must be arms. They must be bearable, and they must be in common use for self-defense. The instruments at issue here do not satisfy that standard for at least two reasons. First, large capacity magazines are not arms. They are accessories that are not necessary to the operation of any firearm. — Hunger.

We see the standard twisting from “in common use for lawful purposes” into “in common use for self-defense”, no surprise there.

Of course, the Supreme Court has issued an opinion saying that ammunition and magazines are indeed arms.
Read More

Roberrt Bevis v. City of Naperville (7th Cir.)

This is the oral arguments for the above case. This is an AW/LCM ban case.

I hope you don’t have high blood pressure. I’m going to be reading this tomorrow and figuring out what some of the dumbest things said were.

Case argued by Erin Murphy for Amicus Curiae National Shooting Sports Foundation, Inc. and Ms. Sarah A. Hunger for Appellee State of Illinois in 23-1353, Gilbert Dickey for Appellant Javier Herrera, Ms. Sarah A. Hunger for Appellees Brendan F. Kelly and Kwame Raoul and Jessica M. Scheller for Appellees Toni Preckwinkle and Cook County, Illinois in 23-1793, Ms. Sarah A. Hunger for Appellants Brendan F. Kelly and Kwame Raoul and Erin Murphy for Appellees Caleb Barnett, Brian Norman, Hood’s Guns & More, Pro Gun and Indoor Range and National Shooting Sports Foundation, Inc. in 23-1825, Attorney Mr. Thomas G. Maag for Appellees Jeremy W. Langley, Timothy B. Jones and Matthew Wilson in 23-1827. [157] [7320281] [23-1353, 23-1825, 23-1793, 23-1826, 23-1827, 23-1828] (KRA)

Case heard and taken under advisement by panel: Frank H. Easterbrook, Circuit Judge; Diane P. Wood, Circuit Judge and Michael B. Brennan, Circuit Judge. [156] [7320278] [23-1353, 23-1825, 23-1793, 23-1826, 23-1827, 23-1828] (KRA)
Robert Bevis v. City of Naperville, 23-1353, (7th Cir.)


Read More

Pure Geek Dump

I feel like I am coming to the end of a long journey. Yesterday I managed to get another part of the puzzle working. I might actually be able to finish (hah!) this personal project.

I do not like WordPress. We call it the security breach. If it hasn’t happened today, it will happen tomorrow. So, I’m going to talk about the process.

The goal

To be able to easily insert citations and bibliographies into WordPress articles.

Requirements:

  1. It has to be Easy
  2. It has to look good in the final results.
  3. It has to be easy to create citations

Item One requires a Graphical User Interface. In other words, I need to be able to get to a citation with just a few clicks. It also means that I can’t be clicking on multiple windows or carefully copying, so I can paste links. It really needs to be simple.
Read More