cato wrote:
This case will not effect us too much as there was not a real 2nd A. argument made buy the plaintiff to beconsidered by that court. The plaintiff who represented himself made several errors in his pleadings. We are not hurt by the ruling although we are distressed by it's findings at face value.
Are you reading that appellate court's decision and not seeing an obvious anti-gun bias?
Are you siding withLEO's practice ofpointing a gun in a man's face, to cuff him, to Mirandize him, to confiscate his gun, tofrisk him, for the LEO to state "that he was the only one allowed to carry a weapon on his beat" all becausea citizenwas legally bearing his gun?!
He bears a gun in a "high crime neighborhood" and he gets treated like a criminal. If he doesn't bear a gun, he's a great target in this "high crime neighborhood." What a carriage of misjustice!
Please, I can't see how anyone could defend this court's decision!