Does virtually nothing for me in San Diego -- unless I'm willing to sue on the basis of this outcome -- and in the first paragraph they grant the premise of licensing. So California remains f'ed.
The only other place this ruling will have some impact is Chicago. What I find extraordinary if I don't need a permit for speaking why do I need a permit for carrying? Answer me that Supreme Court Fascists. ----- Original Message ----- From: Zack Bass To: [email protected] Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 10:59 AM Subject: [LibertarianEnterprise] Re: Heller decision terrible Could have been worse, the Feds could have let the States continue to do as they have been doing. This decision by the Feds DOES change some Laws that are on the books, for example the DC Law! Once again the Feds are the white-hats protecting us from excesses of the States. --- In [email protected], "Robert D. Silvetz, M.D." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Well, I just read the Heller decision. > > Once again, admitting a premise of the enemy eviscerated the significance > that this lawsuit could have had. > > Yes -- 2nd Am is an individual right. Big whoopy do. The decision doesn't > crush ANY of the rules on the books ESPEcIALLY the noxious item of licensing > requirements. > > But since "Heller conceded... licensing... fair... if not capriciously or > arbitrarily enforced" I STILL HAVE TO ASK FUCKING PERMISSION TO USE MY 2nd > Am rights. > > Sadness... and 4 f'ing Supremes DISSENTED!!!! Fascists. >
