VIN SUPRYNOWICZ thoughts on Alan Gura

[Hazcat]

VIN SUPRYNOWICZ: 'And every other terrible instrument'

In a "move that surprised some observers," the Chicago Tribune reported Wednesday, attorney Alan Gura, appearing before the U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of the federal guard who sued the District of Columbia in 2003, claiming he feels unsafe because he's not allowed to keep his guns at home, "appeared to concede large chunks of his argument, moving away from an absolutist position on gun rights."

"He concurred, at one point, with Justice Stephen Breyer that a ban on machine guns or plastic guns" (whatever those are) "would be constitutional because those weren't the kind of arms normally carried by members of state militias in the early days of the United States."

Was it a failure of nerve under pressure, or did somebody get to this guy?


More at link http://www.lvrj.com/opinion/16936861.html

[CurrieS103]

I heard that when I  listened to the oral arguments.  I cringed when he said "plastic guns". 

[Hazcat]

Yeah I wondered about that too.  At the same time his answers to these criticisms have been good and I can't imagine the pressure you feel when your addressing the SCOTUS.

[Outlaw]

I really don't think Gura wanted to get off on a tangent when the machine gun issue was presented to him. If he would have said "well, yeah, machine guns should be legal too" How do you think the Justices would have reacted? HELLO! Hell, they would have made their decision right then and there. Vin had some great points, but Gura went through a lot of mock presentations on this and I'm sure at least one of those folks threw that at him. I don't think either of them did what I would call "a fantastic job" during their presentation because the Justices had some pretty tough (and dumb) questions, but I think Gura was the best at it. I personally think D.C. should have looked a little harder for an attorney.  Either way I think D.C. is stuck with a dumb law on gun control, even after June.  But that's just me....J.C.

[tombogan03884]

I have to agree with Outlaw, The purpose of this case is to get a definite ruling from the SCOTUS that we can use to launch our counter to 40 years of socialist lies and creeping infringement.

[Sponsor]