Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Supreme Court Rejects Appeal Seeking Gun-Carrying Rights
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Dave70968" data-source="post: 3003989" data-attributes="member: 13624"><p>Agreed, but a significant number of cases come before the Court have constitutional issues; moreover, there are simply too many cases for the court to hear them all. From 2001-2010, the Court averaged about 1674 <em>paid</em> petitions for cert (ignoring <em>in forma pauperis</em> petitions as they tend to be without merit; if you had a real claim, you could probably find a lawyer to take it). Of those, the Court granted cert in an average of about 72/year...a touch over 4% of the time.</p><p></p><p>The Court tends to focus on issues where there's a circuit split--that is, a difference of ruling between the different circuits on the same issue. So far, I'm not aware of any circuit that has ruled in favor of an interpretation that the 2nd <em>does</em> protect a right to carry outside the home; places where that's likely to happen tend to have friendly carry laws anyway, so such a suit just wouldn't happen, let alone get up to the appellate level.</p><p></p><p>Yes, I agree, it would be nice to have the Court rule, once and for all, in our favor, but it's not going to happen overnight even under the best of circumstances. The justices aren't derelict in their duty by turning down the case, even if a couple of them dissented from the decision not to grant cert.</p><p></p><p>Have patience. We didn't lose our rights in a day; we won't get them back so quickly either.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Dave70968, post: 3003989, member: 13624"] Agreed, but a significant number of cases come before the Court have constitutional issues; moreover, there are simply too many cases for the court to hear them all. From 2001-2010, the Court averaged about 1674 [I]paid[/I] petitions for cert (ignoring [I]in forma pauperis[/I] petitions as they tend to be without merit; if you had a real claim, you could probably find a lawyer to take it). Of those, the Court granted cert in an average of about 72/year...a touch over 4% of the time. The Court tends to focus on issues where there's a circuit split--that is, a difference of ruling between the different circuits on the same issue. So far, I'm not aware of any circuit that has ruled in favor of an interpretation that the 2nd [I]does[/I] protect a right to carry outside the home; places where that's likely to happen tend to have friendly carry laws anyway, so such a suit just wouldn't happen, let alone get up to the appellate level. Yes, I agree, it would be nice to have the Court rule, once and for all, in our favor, but it's not going to happen overnight even under the best of circumstances. The justices aren't derelict in their duty by turning down the case, even if a couple of them dissented from the decision not to grant cert. Have patience. We didn't lose our rights in a day; we won't get them back so quickly either. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Supreme Court Rejects Appeal Seeking Gun-Carrying Rights
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom