thanks brich! this presentation sounded a little better, from our perspective, then the philly hearing.
they did try to work in more scalia references, and to the recent stungun case where alito/thomas made a longer discussion and referenced their opinion of points related to heller.
the female judge here seemed to be on the anti side, a bit.
i sometimes wonder if these folks, the judges, even know the difference between the semi and full auto is. like, if they had 2 placed in from of them, with all the same forearm/stock/sight combos, they could tell the difference.
or even more so, shot the firearms. single vs single/burst/fa.
another thing that i get concerned with...
this hearth/home stuff. i mean... if the .gov told you to home and protest something in your living room, to exercise your right in your home ONLY, that would go over pretty bad. or that i should only be religious in my house.
they also seemed to want to avoid discussion of specific 2a matters. both the plaintiff and judges seemed to clearly state that.
i know that this is probably based on what some court decided somewhere in the past, but as a non-lawyer type, i don't agree that any of my rights are only to be exercised in my house.
as a non-lawyer, the way some of this stuff works seems odd. 1 high school business law class, and 1 basic class in college have me scratching my head.
brich2929 wrote:5th Circuit (New Orleans) Audio is now available http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/OralArgReco ... 6-2016.mp3
The judges in this circuit seemed much more welcoming to our argument. I feel pretty good about this one, as does the attorney, Mr. Stamboulieh.