Quote:
Originally Posted by Siobhra
Maybe we should go the other way. Keep pushing the city to enforce the new laws.
Just so they will get sued and we can point to it come the next election.
|
Unfortunately this is a case of being "dead right". Its like fighting the IRS - you're right, they're wrong, but guess who
really wins in the end?
The poor soul who gets flipped for, say, $1,000 - $7,000 in guns is likely to have far far more than that in legal bills and lost revenue and lost time. They may actually lose their job. Suing is a novel concept, but you still have to feed the cat and eat as well.
I think Nutter knows this - and I believe it was built into his plan. The only way for this to work would be for a large entity like the NRA to provide $$$ backing for the subject. Suing a government entity is very difficult because it has access to endless amounts of money. You also have a good chance of having to be heard in Philadelphia - where your jury is likely to be composed of people who voted for Nutter, are scared but incapable of acting on their own (and want someone to do something) and are having a hard time understanding exactly
why you "need" and "AK-47" or a 30 round "clip".
It's better to let big dogs fight it out. I know what you are saying, that it would be nice to drag this into the media, but I for one don't want Nutter to get anymore soapbox time than he's already got. He wouldn't be recalcitrant or upset that he was being sued - it's
exactly what he wants, so he can play the martyr against the evil NRA and people that he labels as contributing to the problem (that's us).