This certification is not really a big deal for the chief law enforcement officer (CLEO) making it, and it DOES NOT expressly make the CLEO legally responsible for the weapon or your use of it, or its theft. I have not heard of any successful case against a CLEO for signing the certification for a gun that was criminally misused. That is, in my opinion, a spurious excuse for not signing. There is even a case addressing this issue, Searcy v. City of Dayton, 38 F.3d 282 (6th Cir. 1994). The estate of a drug dealer murdered by an off duty Dayton, Ohio, police officer with his personally owned “Mac-11″ machine gun sued the city that employed the cop. One of the grounds for suit was the police chief’s having signed the transfer paperwork for the murder weapon. The court held that that claim should have been dismissed by the trial court; without a showing that somehow the act of signing was negligent, (under Ohio law) and led to the harm (murder) complained of, there was no cause of action. Signing the form was not negligent in itself, nor was it a reckless or wanton act, as the trial court claimed the plaintiff could try to prove at trial. Although this case is only directly binding on the area of the 6th circuit, and need not bind state courts, the court recognized what common sense, and the certification say, the person signing does not open himself up to any liability by doing so.
–
Gun Porn
A serious 3-gun rig. Shark subcompact 9mm
how far gun rights have come
Glenn Reynolds on the McDonald case.
Glenn Reynolds on the McDonald case.
Brady Bunch on Kagan
Denny Henny seem to like her because she has a fondness for the collective rights mythology: And thus Elena Kagan made it clear that the Roberts Court, in its Heller ruling, had defied Supreme Court precedent (the 70-year-old Miller decision) a hallmark of judicial activism. Ms. Kagan recognized in her testimony that Heller is the [...]
Denny Henny seem to like her because she has a fondness for the collective rights mythology:
And thus Elena Kagan made it clear that the Roberts Court, in its Heller ruling, had defied Supreme Court precedent (the 70-year-old Miller decision) a hallmark of judicial activism. Ms. Kagan recognized in her testimony that Heller is the law and is entitled to all the precedent that any decision is entitled to . . . No doubt the irony has not escaped her that Heller is the law only because it showed no respect whatsoever for established precedent.
The Heller and McDonald decisions both defied precedent (to say nothing of the plain text of the Second Amendment) in fashioning a new right to be armed in the home for self-defense. Fortunately, and paradoxically, both rulings establish the foundation for the continued constitutionality of gun control laws that will make it harder for dangerous people to get guns, while still allowing gun ownership by law-abiding and responsible adults.
There was no supreme court precedent and to say so is bogus. In fact, you guys scrubbed reference to that lie from your own page.
BTW, Denny, you’re off the narrative. It’s supposed to be Heller was good because it takes gun bans off the table.
Well, if you insist
From Travel
 |
| From Travel |
Gun Owners of America endorses Ron Ramsey
So says TN Report.
The gunny
Advises on LE competitions.
NRA and Harry Reid
Reader Mike: Ill give you 4 words why NRA should support Reid. Majority Leader Chuck Schumer. Word.
Reader Mike:
Ill give you 4 words why NRA should support Reid.
Majority Leader Chuck Schumer.
Word.
Comments