Brady Bunch sues to stop CC in Nat Parks

[johnsteele]

"We should not be making it easier for dangerous people to carry concealed firearms in our parks."

I'm not a dangerous person. The State of Florida has issued me a Concealed Firearms License so as far as they are concerned I'm not dangerous.

Can we sue the Brady Bunch for defamation of character or slander?

[wolfhunter]

You know I try to be respectful of the opinions of other people but what the heck do people like the Brady Bunch use to base they're opnions on? With all of the facts out there showing who are committing the gun crimes and who are not, are they really so caught up in they're own rhetoric to see the truth?

The only fact the Brady Bunch is interested in is the fact that gun owners aren't subjects.

"The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly" was just on. Clint's character said, "There are 2 kinds of people in this world. Those with loaded guns, and those that dig." Kinda puts it in perspective.

[gpbarth]

If the Brady Center was some little-known loud-mouthed bunch (like the Westboro Baptist Church), we could just laugh at them and ignore their pitiful existence. But as a political lobby group, that cannot be done. Even if they ARE morons. I really feel for Jim Brady, I do. If someone shot me in the head, I'd be a little more than pissed. But I'd go after the scum that shot me, and others of his kind and make stronger laws to keep BGs off the street. You'd think the entire group got shot in the head, 'cause they don't make much sense.

BTW, I like Clint's (other) lines in "The Outlaw Josie Wales" :

Bounty hunter: You're wanted, Wales.
Josey Wales: Reckon I'm right popular. You a bounty hunter?
Bounty hunter: A man's got to do something for a living these days.
Josey Wales: Dyin' ain't much of a living, boy.

[tattedupboy]

Why am I not surprised? Of course they'd try to reverse it. I hope they get laughed out of court like they deserve to be.

[gvaldeg1]

Why am I not surprised? Of course they'd try to reverse it. I hope they get laughed out of court like they deserve to be.

I'd like to think that they'd get "laughed out of court" but , unfortunately, the Brady Bunch" has become fairly powerful politically and they can afford high-priced liberal attorneys for their side of the case. Logic dictates that their case should fail but it may come down to a matter of the opinion of 3 Justices on the DC Court of Appeals. If the Brady Bunch is successful, it's unlikely that the highly liberal Eric Holder (Obama's Attorney General nominee), would appeal it to the Supreme Court. We'll just have to see how this "shakes out". I think that this is the most important gun rights case since DC v Heller.

[gvaldeg1]

Here's a link to the "Of Arms & the Law" site. There's a good discussion and several comments on this matter as well as a link to a PDF file containing the text of entire Brady lawsuit.

Of Arms and the Law: Brady Campaign sues to block Park Service rule

[gdcleanfun]

Y'know, the last National Park, and private campground for that matter, I entered didn't have a metal detector across the road. Who is to know if I cc when I enter or not? Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead!

[ecocks]

Y'know, the last National Park, and private campground for that matter, I entered didn't have a metal detector across the road. Who is to know if I cc when I enter or not? Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead!

The only problem with that is that if you ever get outed, you're probably going to lose the CCP and face a Federal charge. It isn't like carrying in a Simon Property mall and simply being asked to leave, you say okay and then go. There was a post here from someone (Toreksha?) last year whose son was cited with carrying while traveling on the Natchex Trace State Parkway. He was facing all kind sof trouble. Anyone know how that turned out BTW?

Toreksha, if that wasn't you please accept my apology for raising your name.

[tattedupboy]

What bothers me is the fact that antis and anti groups make no attempt to distinguish law abiding gun owners from criminals. At first glance, not wanting dangerous people to carry in national parks does make sense (I know I don't want dangerous people carrying there, or anywhere for that matter); however, they also make no attempt to stick up for the law abiding, thus lumping them into the same category as criminals.

[Steelhorse]

What bothers me most of all is that the Brady Bunch is redressing their grievance of a clear discretionary executive power within the judicial branch. This is a huge slippery slope for the court to endeavor.

The court should dismiss this action, under the constitutional political doctrine of the separation of powers.