Comments on: Alan Gura on Machine Guns

By: Alcibiades McZombie

Alcibiades McZombie — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 19:47:36 +0000

I was kind of concerned about those armor-piercing bullet statements made by the justices as well. But there just wasn’t the time to fight every battle and correct every inaccuracy.

By: JJR

JJR — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 13:50:21 +0000

Gura couldn’t have avoided talking about MG’s, the Justices would’ve drawn it out of him in any case. Regrettable also that he had to invoke mythological, non-existent entities like “plastic guns that can evade metal detection” but I guess for the sake of the legal thought experiment all he was saying is that IF such tools COULD be manufactured (nevermind if they can be right now–which they can’t) then they could be argued to be reasonably subject to certain restrictions. The Law is a funny thing…you’d think reason, scientific validity and truth, especially historical truth, would have more bearing than they actually do in legal settings, but they simply don’t.

Gura made some very excellent points and Ithink it was a win for our side.
The DC litigator was utterly incoherent & ridiculous, by contrast.

By: Micheal

Micheal — Thu, 20 Mar 2008 23:18:23 +0000

First off, this particular case was not about NFA weapons,but the RIght to have a hand gun in DC and if the People have a right to have guns according to the Constitutions.

Sure, he could have handled it better, but that is after the fact and arm chair quarterbacking. He did the best he could and I believe he will achieve the for mentioned task.

NFA laws and other federal regulations will take years to take on, so we just need to be as patient and diligent as the opposing side is.