DC Gun Ban, Justice Kennedy, Grizzlies

[Kuan]

Sorry Justice Kennedy. But you'd better have a bit more than a handgun to drop a grizzly.

http://www.slate.com/id/2186853/

Justice Kennedy thinks D.C. residents need protection—from grizzlies.

By Dahlia Lithwick
Posted Tuesday, March 18, 2008, at 7:31 PM ET

Is the D.C. gun law constitutional?

With all due respect to those who complain that the justices on the Supreme Court are too secretive, and for those who wish, perhaps, that David Souter was more like David "West Side Days Inn" Paterson, oral argument today in District of Columbia v. Heller offers up a bounty of alarming personal revelations. The least of which is that judges are completely political. But who knew that a case testing the scope of the Second Amendment's "right to bear arms" would smoke out a secret side of Justice Anthony Kennedy? A side so intensely protective of his right to self-defense that he makes—as I count—four separate references to some mythical "remote settler" who—at the time of the framing of the Constitution—would have needed a gun to "defend himself and his family against hostile Indian tribes and outlaws, wolves and bears, and grizzlies."
.
.
.

[Jim B.]

I was very fortunate to have had Justice Anthony Kennedy as my Constitutional Law professor at McGeorge School of Law back in 1973 in Sacramento, California when I studied the law.

He was a brilliant thinker, and his yearly lecture about the FDR Court-Packing incident was so riveting, that it was a widely known event, to which outsiders were permitted to attend.

My parents got to attend it, on my invitation, one year.

[t walgamuth]

I agree, unless you have a 30 06 handgun forget it!


Tom W

[Hatterasguy]

Desert Eagle .50AE.

Or this:

[Skippy]

Ruger makes a 2" barrelled .454 Casull just for bear defense. I think Taurus makes a clone.

[luvlaw]

Jim-

I can't say I am Justice Kennedy's biggest fan, although it must have been nice to have him as you Con-law prof.

I did have the honor of meeting Justices Scalia and Thomas last year though.

Read the Kennedy opinion Lawrence v. Texas opinion and get back to me.

Oh, yes the "mysteries of life"

[aklim]

Originally Posted by Hatterasguy

Or this:

Mine is the longer version.

[aklim]

The only question is how good a shot you are. If you are a great shot, a 357 might be enough to blind the bear. If not, even a 500 S&W Magnum with 500 grain bullets aren't enough.