Mutual Admiration Society

As of this writing, the Geek with a .45 has been the only commenter on "Game Over." I commented on his blog that I was also somewhat inspired by a piece he'd written a while back, and that I would appreciate it if he'd send me the link to it. Well he did, in an email that I won't repeat here. My response to him, though I will:

Thanks.

That essay really stirred things in me that had been lying dormant. I felt the urge to write something, but I knew it would be REALLY long and it would be a massive amount of work to put together. Then Francis Porretto at that same time started his eight-part series "Tyranny and its Fringes," which wasn't what I was really looking for, but was rich fodder.

I, too, have been looking to the Judicial Branch to bail us out of the mess we're in, but the more case law I read the more disillusioned I am, as Randy Barnett was. The Scalia quote is what tore it for me.

My position on gun laws was "this far and no further until the 2nd Amendment is legally recognized as an individual right, and incorporated under the 14th Amendment's 'privileges and immunities' and 'equal protection' clauses."

Well, I understand now that Hell will probably freeze over before that happens. The NRA believes that through a slow, steady, incrementalist approach they can achieve this. The Silviera group thought that the NRA was chicken a full-court press would force the Supreme Court's hand. The NRA thought that the Silveira group was dangerous. It's apparent to me that they're both tilting at windmills. They want to overturn a century of precedent. It ain't gonna happen. The honest judges are constrained by bad precedent (see Kozinski) and the less honest are more than happy with the law as it stands. AND THAT'S NOT GOING TO CHANGE.

Damn, now I have to blog this....