At 02:00 PM 4/14/2004, you wrote:
[snip] Surprisingly, the
issues that have most alienated many gun
groups from the Bush administration have little to do with firearms,
but
rather with the Patriot Act and other homeland security measures
instituted after Sept. 11. Opposition to such laws has
Congress shall make no law
Now that gives one pause
In light of some of the so-called new rights we have developed in the not
too distant past, privacy being one of the most significant,
can it be that not enumerating rights, granted or guaranteed, is no bar
to additional rights, and
I was engaged in a discussion with some Cowboy Action
Shooters that concerned the risks of traveling with guns from State X
into the State of New York for a match. It was suggested that
perhaps it would be a good idea to have a large organization like
SASS [the Single Action Shooting Society]
At 03:10 PM 6/22/2004, Jon Roland wrote:
This raises a more fundamental
issue: what constitutional power does state or national government have
to license anything. If we take seriously the Fifth Amendment prohibition
on disablement and deprivation of life, liberty, or property without due
It has come to my attention that the airports in Queens
County, NY and in Albany, NY, are enforcing new York State laws with
respect to innocent travelers. Apparently, if you board a plane
with a legal handgun in your jurisdiction, and have to pass through one
of those airports, and have to
I received this yesterday. As I read it, the Court is
right on the PI Clause but its opinion about an individual right is
contrary to current scholastic and political thought on the subject. But
this is the group to ask.
I hope that the NRA, CCRKBA, SAF, and other such groups did not support
At 02:00 PM 8/10/2005, you wrote:
Texas. With a few
exceptions (subject to automatic prohibition), ALL private property
owners in TEXAS, including churches, must post a state specified sign in
order to exclude permit holders carrying a firearm
Sports arenas are private, for example, racetracks,
At 02:00 PM 1/15/2006, Guy wrote:
I'm not convinced on this
approach.
That makes two of us. I presented it as a possibility.
Let's assume
for the moment the destination is not a workplace, but another person's
home. Is the right of this homeowner
secondary?
Never.
If Maggie
doesn't like guns,
I ran the antique shotgun thing by my class 4 dealer and got
the following reply; it is totally his and I have not verified the
statute or the regs:
Not a Hypothetical situation.
Real Life NFA Law, First, to be considered to be a modern firearm is has
to be made after 1899 and be able to shoot
As an FFL holder for more than 20 years, let me repeat the
points y'all made with brief comments:
The number of gun dealers
in the United States has plummeted 78 percent in the past 10 years as
tens of thousands of home-based dealers surrendered their federal
licenses.
At 02:01 PM 7/25/2006, you wrote:
This question has come up from
time to time. It seems clear that the bulk of precedents does not support
a premises proprietor (which would be the role of an employer) being
liable for the criminal wrongdoing of persons on the premises, as long as
there was not
Joseph E. Olson
asked:
(1) I need information on how CCW-states handle the question
of
licensed carry in churches.
(2) Also, other than in Minnesota, have there been challenges
to the
procedure?
As usual, I need it ASAP.
You are correct about Texas. A house of worship must post a
At 02:04 PM 11/27/2006, you wrote:
It seems to me that many assault weapon and handgun bans, and other
firearm laws are based on implicit theories of lethality derived
from the media rather than actual empirical evidence of lethality
and effectiviness of firearms in combat.
As a general
Sorry if this is late in being sent; I'vr been off my computer and I
cannot reply remotely:
From: Greg Jacobs [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Apr 19, 2007 2:21 PM
To: firearmsregprof@lists.ucla.edu
Subject: A bogeyman under every bed - a brief response
Professor Joseph Olson asks:
Seriously
It looks as if the 2A showdown might come to pass. Washington, D.C.,
announced they will appeal to the Parker case.
I won't hold my breath waiting to see if the SCOTUS actually hears it
***GRJ***
___
To post, send message to
At 02:00 PM 2/6/2008, EV wrote:
Can anyone please point me to a good discussion of the advantages
and disadvantages of shotguns vs. handguns for self-defense? The
more specific the cite, the better. Many thanks,
JW wrote:
I still haven't unpacked book boxes here in sunny Florida, but look
At 02:00 PM 2/12/2008, you wrote:
I don't have it in writing here (since I retired to Florida), but the
Harris County (Houston), TX, county prosecutor was a CC opponent who
changed his perspective about 5-6 years after Texas passed it's CCW law
in 1995. Jim Dark at TSRA or John Ridlehuber with
Prof. Olson writes:
The reason is simple: The persistent and always tense debate over
gun rights has thinly veiled underlying racial and socio-political
struggles that are as old as the Union itself.
I might be opening a can of worms but here goes.
While I admit to being something less
At 02:00 PM 4/27/2008, From Prof Olson's notes about Marion Hammer's comments:
The right to control one's property is not absolute.
I can't thank the Professor enough for that piece, which I had not
read previously. In summary it says more about what i was suggesting
in my last message
.o- 651-523-2142
Hamline University School of Law (MS-D2037) f- 651-523-2236
St. Paul, MN 55113-1235 c- 612-865-7956
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Greg Jacobs mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 04/27/08 3:42
PM [EMAIL PROTECTED] 04/27/08 3:42 PM
Prof. Olson
=
At 04:28 PM 4/27/2008, Jon Roland wrote:
A right not being absolute doesn't mean the government has the power
to restrict it legislatively. Constitutional rights are immunities
against actions by government officials, not rules for adjudicating
conflicts of rights among
Simply this:
Congratulations to us all! :-)
Much litigation to follow but good job!
***GRJ***
___
To post, send message to Firearmsregprof@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Reading through this, I'm struck by a repeated theme:
The opinion of the court repeatedly references Justice Steven's dissent,
and in several instances literally belittles his view. To wit, on page 30:
But even assuming that this legislative history is relevant,
An interesting subject, and not one I usually expect from my learned
colleagues of the Bar. But, if Professor V allows it, excellent,
because I think I know more about handling guns than handling legal
treatises on constitutional law.
I see that the consensus seems to be that handguns are
Might I sugest a colloquialism or little used term?
http://www.dictionary.net/in+hand
9. Personal possession; ownership; hence, control; direction; management; --
usually in the plural. ``Receiving in hand one year's tribute.'' --Knolles.
***GRJ***
I can only give you anecdotal experience. When I lived in NYC I had
enough issues with their long gun licensing procedure; I never got
around to handguns (but someone gave me two and I hid them in a bank
vault for years). A couple of years ago my son-in-law allowed his home
permit to expire.
I am pretty sure Hawaii is tough on getting handgun permits, too. I
recall my conversations with cowboy action shooters when I was there for
a short while on Navy Reserve duty. Everything is registered. Not as
crazy as NY, NJ, Chicago, or DC, probably, but not easy.
***GRJ***
One of the questions surrounding the Second Amendment is, what exactly
is a well regulated militia? So, what did the phrase well regulated
mean at the time? The Oxford English Dictionary has a sample. Gibbon
used it twice.
FYI, not only was that term anciently used and understood by the
1. Re:Mass Attacks do not require firearms (Firearmsregprof
Digest, Vol 85, Issue 7) (Jamie Fraser-Paige)
--
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2011 09:17:00 -0700
From: Jamie Fraser-Paigesfbear...@comcast.net
To:
http://www.auctionarms.com/news/article/20110527-Puerto-Rico-Court-A-Second-Amendment-Right-to-Carry-Guns-in-Public-Places.cfm
http://volokh.com/2011/05/11/puerto-rico-intermediate-appellate-court-apparently-recognizes-a-second-amendment-right-to-carry-guns-in-public-places/
Can someone please
http://www.auctionarms.com/news/article/20110527-District-Court-Finds-No-Constitutional-Right-to-Conceal-Carry.cfm
http://joshblackman.com/blog/?p=7002
Call me dense, but I think I agree with this.and that frightens
me I hate agreeing with such things Please correct me!
On a completely intellectual level, I would like to begin a brief
discussion of the case in Oklahoma wherein a pharmacist was convicted
of murder and sentenced to life in prison. All I have to go on is the
store's security camera video, shown over and over on television,
without the benefit
Charles Curley wrote (okay, submitted):
Recent months have seen a former Marine from Indiana, a Tea Party
activist from California and a nurse from Tennessee all arrested and
charged in New York City for possession of firearms they had legal
permits to carry back home. All were nabbed when they
Maybe this is commonly understood by everyone in the gun worldand
maybe the Professor will tolerate this little tidbit of regulatory
news...if for no other reason than it just needs to be out there for all
to see and, secondarily, who knows, maybe I'm wrong. However, having
just been
I don't think that what Professor Olson postulates below is correct but I'm thinking it's a typographical error so I'll enter comments and see what he says:-Original Message-
From: "Olson, Joseph E." <jol...@hamline.edu>
Sent: May 7, 2013 9:43 AM
To: Greg Jacobs <grjtw..
Since Tom is a legal purchaser in his state, this is an example of a
perfectly legal straw man purchase. So there is anti-gun Big Lie
number #3, that all straw man purchases are illegal.
Methinks there is an opportunity here for an OAQ (occasionally asked
questions, or oak): anti-gun Big Lies
Thanks, Professor. That was kind of what I meant. "Strawman" in the ATF context has taken on a different meaning than the one we read about in Contracts 101.***GRJ***-Original Message-
From: "Olson, Joseph E." <jol...@hamline.edu>
Sent: May 8, 2013 2:14
Today's Topics:
1. New Stanford gun control study (Daniel D. Todd)
--
Has anyone reviewed the methodology and findings of the new Stanford study?
,
especially national reciprocity.
I'm just curious if anyone else looks at this case that way or am I Mr.
Pollyanna in this respect?
***Greg Jacobs***
___
To post, send message to Firearmsregprof@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options
On 12/9/2015 2:00 PM, Henry Schaffer wrote:
A discussion of the firearms-related cases which weren't granted cert.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/12/supreme-court-gun-rights/419160/
The Atlantic's article presented one very interesting comment as far as
I was concerned,
What bugs me is that they use the term "mental defective". I can't balance a checkbook worth a tinker's dam and nobody would dare call me mentally defective in any kind of a serious vein. (My friends don't count.) Besides infringing on gun rights it seems to me this ban infringed on a lot more
41 matches
Mail list logo
