General Categories > Laws and Legislation

Creighton Law Professor Fenner on 2nd Amendment.

(1/1)

jimburnetto:
Forgive me if this is not very detailed, but I didn't take notes so it is all from memory.  Here we go, I apologize for the stream of consiousness babbling.

I just had the opportunity to go to a lunch presentation by Professor  Fenner from Creighton Law School.  In attendance were mostly lawyers and about a dozen judges.  I would guess about 250 people were there.

Mostly he spoke about the effect that the Heller case would have.
Some points:
 - 2nd amendment is an individual right.
 - The Heller case said he could have a handgun in his house.  It didn't involve any other types of guns nor any other places.
- Although the decision clarified that the 2a is an individual right, it isn't necessarily a clear cut victory for gun owners.  In fact, there was now a necessity, nay, an opportunity to review these gun laws and...clear them up, implying that people should make them more strict.
 - After the decision is passed, what next?  Make money.  He had 2 pictures of commemorative guns.  1 was a handgun (s&w?) with the scales of justice engraved on it.  The scale was tipped in Heller's favor.  Available for ~500 dollars.  The other was a couple of larger rifles, looked almost like .50 bmg's to me.  One was an "accurate fire" the other was a "rapid fire".  They had gold engraving of Heller's signature & came with a certificate of authenticity.   These were 20,000 dollars a piece.  I believe the guns were limited edition.  The rifles purported to donate $5000 of the sale to the Heller foundation for supporting gun laws.
 - There were a few gasps in the crowd & murmors of disbelief (mostly from women that I could see) when the pictures were shown of the guns.  Also when the professor mentioned in his closing annecdote that these tax board members owned x number of guns.  You have to realize, though, that the professor was subtly slanting his speech toward the anti-gun side of the argument and that a lot lawyers in the room who demographically, I believe, generally lean politically left or democrat.


3 things that Heller's lawyer had going for him & what you should look for if you're a "lawyer with a cause".
1) Have the best claimant.
2) Fight the most restrictive law.
3) Ask for as little as possible.
1) Have the best claimant.   Heller was a security guard for federal courthouses.  He was trusted to carry & carried around judges all of the time for his job.  Yet, he could not have a handgun in his own house for his own personal safety.
2) DC has arguably the most restrictive gun law in the country.  Tied were chicago & san diego.
3) All he wanted was to allow Heller to have his work handgun in his house.  He didn't touch on anything else--concealed carry, carrying in public, other types of weapons, etc.  By asking small & specific, he was likely to get the judgement he wanted.

What is constitutional law?  5 votes.
4 supreme court judges dissented.  They argued that the 2nd amendment applied only to state milita.  5 supreme court judges said it was an individual right.  What is con law?  The opinion of the majority, or 5 of nine votes.   A narrow margin to be sure.

Fenner  was obviously shaded toward the anti gun side.  Not overtly, he presented facts.  But he also soaked them a little with his opinion.

He closed with 2 anectdotes.  1 was speaking about a meeting of 4 of tax board members somewhere & they were asked the question: Do you own any guns.  They all said yes.  They all had multiple long guns & hand guns.  A couple of them showed bravado in their answers, such as "Yes, and I'm a good shot."  or "Yes, and I will take any of you on".

The second was "Will the Heller decision make us safer?"  He said he didn't know for a fact, but had his opinion & gave this statistic.  Nevada has the highest number of guns per capita.  Nevada has the highest rate of injury by a gun.

That is mostly what I remember.  If I think of anything else, I will report back.  Feel free to comment, or jog my memory with any questions.

Jim




 

Aldo:

--- Quote from: jimburnetto on January 16, 2009, 02:32:03 PM ---Nevada has the highest number of guns per capita.  Nevada has the highest rate of injury by a gun.
--- End quote ---

...and Omaha has the strictest gun carry restrictions in NE...and Omaha has the highest rate of murder by a gun...

Sorry, but I am on this anti-Omaha gun carry restriction binge right now...

Otherwise, interesting post.  Thanks for taking the time to clue us in.

It will be interesting to see how all the new world order of "O" will ripple effect our 2A in the next 1-4 years....or more!

Navigation

[0] Message Index