Fwd: Where is the NRA on the Burress case?

[Steven Jamar]

sorry if this shows up twice -- i've had some technical problems in the last
few hours.




I'm no fan of what the NRA became after it stopped being about instruction
and gun safety and an ordinary middling interest group and became an
advocacy group calling ATF officers "jack-booted thugs".
But it strikes me that the NRA can properly choose which situations it wants
to advocate for and which not.  And a case like Burress is a lousy test case
and is not a sympathetic case in pretty much any manner.

Houston and Marshall carefully chose test cases -- as do many other advocacy
groups.

I don't know all of the NRA positions on all issues -- I believe they oppose
all registration (but not background checks for criminal records) and would
want to be able to carry a gun without a permit and so on.  And I'm sure
they object to reporting laws like the one involved in Burress.

But I wonder what effect Heller will have on their position now that they
won the big issue (individual right) and the court (even the archest of the
arch conservatives) said registration and many other types of regulation are
ok.

Steve

-- 
Prof. Steven Jamar
Howard University School of Law
Associate Director, Institute of Intellectual Property and Social Justice
(IIPSJ) Inc.



-- 
Prof. Steven Jamar
Howard University School of Law
Associate Director, Institute of Intellectual Property and Social Justice
(IIPSJ) Inc.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ucla.edu/pipermail/conlawprof/attachments/20081210/72a73347/attachment.htm