Of Arms and the Law

Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home


Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography
The Lecture Notes of St. George Tucker
Original Popular Understanding of the 14th Amendment
Originalism and its Tools


2nd Amendment Discussions

1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Ammo.com, deals on ammunition
Scopesfield: rifle scope guide
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Clean Up ATF (heartburn for headquarters)
Concealed Carry Today
Knives Infinity, blades of all types
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
Leatherman Multi-tools And Knives
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
Gun Rights
Gun Trust Lawyer NFA blog
The Big Bore Chronicles
Good for the Country
Knife Rights.org
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Email Subscription
Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 6.8.7
Site Design by Sekimori

« An analysis of Chicago's legal position | Main | Unity »

Human end of the Chicago case

Posted by David Hardy · 30 January 2010 05:01 PM

Here's the story. Interesting. Lead plaintiff, Otis McDonald, is a 76 year old grandfather and lives with his wife in a risky neighborhood. He's been burglarized repeatedly and once threatened with death. He has shotguns, but can't keep them on the nightstand when he turns in.

All in all, the perfect person to be bringing a 2nd and 14th Amendment challenge.

· Chicago gun case

3 Comments | Leave a comment

Jim | January 31, 2010 8:20 PM | Reply

Wow, I realize this will sound petty, but I sure hope this gentleman remains healthy through at least June, if not for many years to come!

private | February 1, 2010 11:50 AM | Reply

I hope that Mr. McDonald is allowed to sit at the table with his lawyers. It would be nice for the Justices to have to look at a man like that as they consider him not being allowed to have a gun in his home for self-defense

WPZ | February 1, 2010 4:52 PM | Reply

The article itself had illustrative value, too. The Chicago Tribune is extremely anti-gun: shortly after Heller was handed down, they actually editorialized that the Second Amendment was obsolete and bad and should be repealed. Not an op-ed piece, but an actual stated editorial.
This article's author revealed the tension in the Tower, struggling to repress the shop's activist standard operating procedures but leaking the shop's true beliefs all over the place.
Doing the oppo research on McDonald and bringing out his lawsuit history is grotesque. The treatment of the other plaintiffs is perfunctory and indicative of the writer's and editor's annoyance with the whole subject.
Still, it was the big, near-full-front page article of the Sunday edition, and the screamer headline did say "gun rights" in those plain words.
Worth the two bucks just to see them squirm.

Leave a comment