Legal Advice

Republicans are once again in a tizzy regarding the rights of the accused.

This in Politico:

Congressional Republicans want to know whether the Pakistani-born American arrested in the Times Square car bombing plot was read his Miranda rights, with Sen. John McCain saying it would be a “serious mistake” if the suspect was reminded of his right to remain silent.

These guys act like one must be read their rights to actually obtain them. Seems to me that NOT reading him his rights might set up the accused for some sort of defense.

To the lawyers and soon-to-be lawyers at ATK: Am I missing something?

Read more...

AG Calls For New Assault Weapons Ban

Maybe I was too quick to praise Obama's gun stance. AG Eric Holder says that the Administration will seek to reinstitute the 90's era Assault Weapons Ban. He is making an interesting justification by saying that one of the reasons is the increased frequency of Mexican Drug Cartels using these kinds of weapons in Mexico. He believes that they are getting them from US gun shops.

As I said in my comments on the previous gun related thread, I think that law abiding citizens have a liberty interest in being able to own and use firearms. If the government seeks to infringe upon this interest, there should be a compelling interest and it should be done in the most narrow way possible. Given that "assault weapons" are rarely used in crimes (they account for less than 1% of national homicides and in some states, less that .1%), I fail to see how a ban can be justified. I also see this as being a bad political move. Surprising to me, Pelosi isn't interested in passing a ban.

Read more...