Pa. appeals courts sides with Philadelphia’s ban on 3D-printed gun parts

[ArmyVet]

https://www.inquirer.com/news/pennsy...-20240220.html

[GunLawyer001]

I guess the Democrat Wokies would have no problem with laws banning being within 1000 feet of an abortion mill, as long as they don't bar being inside?

Or, we are free to read whatever we want, but it's illegal to write or print anything on their list of un-approved thoughts?

Not all judges are equal. I've encountered Solomonic judges whose wisdom & experience was admirable. And I've met judges who didn't understand their own job; I had a client convicted at a preliminary hearing, & watched as the DJ realized what he'd just done and tried to cover it up (we won on appeal, the CP judge kind of sighed when we explained what happened.)

But this activist nonsense is nothing new; Dred Scott upheld slavery in free states. "Separate but equal" was upheld in the USSC. Roe v Wade was embarrassing nonsense that would shame a carny flim-flam man, with New Age concepts of "penumbras" that allowed made-up Federal powers to supersede the will of the People of the States.

Judges often supersede statutes & precedents with their personal opinions. As soon as they talk about "societal problems", they've departed from applying law & Constitution to the facts before them. We don't put judges on the bench to make policy & resolve societal problems, we put them there as impartial arbiters of the laws created by the Legislature.

I could see some non-frivolous basis for upholding a law banning ALL manufacturing activity in Philadelphia, but this was not a general zoning law. This targeted firearm parts BECAUSE they are firearm parts.

I read decades ago, in the Philadelphia Inquirer, that Philadelphia judges essentially buy their jobs, in the sense that Democrat judicial candidates are presumptive winners in elections, and the Party will give preference to running whomever provides the most campaign dollars to the Party. This is why I avoid Philadelphia courts. And why we need to pay more attention to judicial elections.

[giant_g2]

"watched as the DJ realized what he'd just done and tried to cover it up (we won on appeal, the CP judge kind of sighed when we explained what happened.)"

At least you got a good CP. DJs are a joke, which is why you can (allegedly) get a trial de novo with no cause. They know it's rife with errors. You'll get a chuckle out of this. I had one DJ who responded with "but I'm not prejudice" when asked to dismiss the case with prejudice. The sad part was, once it got to the real judge at the trial de novo, that guy was clueless too - he told us that nothing from the prior trial could be used because this is a "complete do-over" but then proceeded to tell us that raising a motion to dismiss could not be done because they could only be done at the summary trial and you would need a record of it. So much for a trial de novo being a complete reconsideration of the case if you won't consider standard motions. I guess that's what you get with retired family court judges being brought back as summary criminal judges...