Focusing on disarming gangs, and not law-abiding citizens would seem to be a more effective–and constitutional!—way to reduce crime.
You want to tackle firearms-related crime? Lock-up the gang bangers and legalize drugs. It wouldn’t solve the problem. Nothing can. But it would be a hell of a lot more effective than gun control laws. And a lot safer for American democracy, to boot.
Amen.
From our good friends at Google.
Well, at least he predicts Justice Thomas’s vote:
Yet he acknowledged in an interview with USA TODAY that the activities of Justice Clarence Thomas and his wife, who as a Tea Party activist has opposed the 2010 health care law involved in a case pending at the court, have stoked some of the criticism from members of Congress and other quarters. “You can’t help but wish that they had a lower profile,” he said of Thomas and his wife.
“I also don’t think there’s a chance in the world that it will affect his vote,” Stevens added. “That is one vote that you really can predict.”
He said Thomas has consistently taken a narrow view of Congress’ power to regulate interstate commerce and would not need to be swayed in the health care litigation by wife Virginia, a longtime conservative advocate.
Does anyone really think that computers will not do the same for lawyers writing briefs?
This is Law’s Revolution.
Clients will in future gravitate to trusted brands but independent lawyers can continue to play a major role in providing legal services if they take the necessary steps, the Legal Futuresconference heard last week.
Leading figures from five law firm networks – QualitySolicitors (QS), HighStreetLawyer, face2face solicitors, Lawyers2you and 360 Legal Group – agreed that acting to build public recognition was key to law firms surviving competition from alternative business structures.