A cartoon for this wet, rainy Saturday

From the New Yorker.

Tribe

Okay, so they just discovered a tribe of people living deep in the Amazon, and they had never been contacted before. http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/brazil_tribe_dc;_ylt=An1ghM9SB_43gLsoCX3pikEDW7oF

As a plane flew overhead and took pictures, the natives response was to raise bow and arrows at it. My concerns is that this might be yet another terrorist cell living in a remote area. You have to figure, the first action these people took after seeing our society was to raise arms against us. Now, while bow and arrows might not be RPG's, it's still a start. I believe this problem needs to be nipped in the bud. It's highly probable that these are the very people who have been hiding Osama bin Laden all these years. After all, they live in remote areas, their culture is different from ours, and they've managed to hide not for 5 years, but for 500.
Frankly, this problem is going to grow exponentially in the next few years. I won't be satisfied until we've inundated thier culture with western ideas, clothes, playstations and high fructose corn syrup. At that point, maybe they can become civilized.

McCain's bad idea...

Or so says George Will (and me, to no one's surprise). Separation of powers, that fussy little constitutional underpinning that nearly every law student is taught in Con Law to ignore (it impedes "progress," you see), has a little something to say about the Maverick's idea...

But prime ministers sit in the House because Britain's system of government is not based, as ours is, on separation of powers. Granted, America's separation of legislative and executive powers has become blurred. Legislators overextended by their incontinent involvement in everything, and preoccupied with reelection, do more delegating than legislating: Often the "laws" they pass are expressions of sentiments or aspirations that executive branch rulemaking turns into real laws. McCain's proposal would further diminish Congress's dignity by deepening the perception of its subordination

And then we get a reminder (as if we needed one) of how great Jefferson was (and how crappy Wilson was)...

Jefferson considered it monarchical for the president to lecture the legislature, so he submitted a written report, as did every subsequent president until Woodrow Wilson. He was the first president to criticize the Framers' constitutional system of checks and balances as an outmoded impediment to presidents' freedom.

Please read George Will.

Courthouse

So, I'm filling in for Leo while he's gone for a while, hope I fit in

It appears that the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania is breaking the law.

According to 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 913 ,each county is responsible for providing their residents and any visitors to a court facility with lockers to store firearms and other dangerous weapons. The Commonwealth appears not to have met this burden. First, many courts refuse to store knives. Let us look at the language of the statute.

Lockers are provided for “persons carrying firearms under … or for the checking of other dangerous weapons…” Dangerous weapons are later defined as “A bomb, grenade, blackjack, sandbag, metal knuckles, dagger, knife….” Yet knives will not be stored… Interesting.

Secondly, the County does not provide facilities for storing firearms at the Federal courthouse. Let’s look at the definition of courthouse.

The first definition is “The courtroom of a court of record”. So, a court of record (which the federal courthouse is) does not have a facility available for the checking of firearms.” This means that the county is in violation of a CRIMINAL STATUTE, just as surely as a citizen would be if they carried a rifle into a courtroom.

The statute does NOT say the county must provide facilities only at state/county courthouses. It mentions all courts of records.

The reason that these statutes are not being upheld is a matter of convenience—though not for the citizens.

Law enforcement simply does not wish to be hassled with storing items that citizens lawfully possess. The county is not being asked by the federal government to do anything—this is a state law. The county is not being asked to store additional items—knives are in the statute. Law enforcement should not be allowed to ignore laws, even when they disagree with them. After all, they hold other citizens to this standard every day.

Addition to Dissenting Opinion - Chris Miller

While Kevin and I are out on another legal planet, Chris Miller will be guest-writing for us. In addition to being a fantastic legal mind, Chris shined as the Best Oral Advocate at Drexel University Earle Mack School of Law's Inaugural Moot Court Competition. He's keeping himself busy now working in the Philadelphia area for a small firm.

Please welcome Chris Miller.

Hiatus- Law Review Write-in

I have to get a 3000 word law review note in by June 7. I will not be posting anything until after that's all done.

Good luck to everyone else who's writing.

We're Famous! (Sort of).

We've grown up quickly here, apparently.

Somehow, Professor Dan Filler of The Faculty Lounge found us and linked to our stories about Jos. A. Bank mishaps and the Perfect Cocktail.

Fame. We'll try not to let it go to our heads.

The Gentleman Lawyer: Moving Here

I realized today that my efforts to keep up two blogs would soon prove futile. As a result, any future Gentleman Lawyer posts will appear on this blog with a "Gentleman Lawyer" tag. It'll make everyone's life easier.

For archiving purposes, here are the two previous posts from The Gentleman Lawyer

Custom Made Suit to Measure - On a Budget!

Happy Hour and the Classic Cocktail

Google Ads

Kinda counterproductive when the target of my recent post about poor men's stores ends up on the Google ads on the right side of the blog, no?

Most Americans Against Concealed Carry-- Too Bad We Have this Constitution.

A friend of mine just sent me this article from GunGuys, which appears to be an anti-individualist rights firearm blog.

Take the time to read it and realize the folly of the argument.
Here's a gem:

The gun lobby has subverted our law books for too long. The NRA has convinced America that concealed weapons are necessary and effective, when they are exactly the opposite: unneeded and dangerous. In Iowa or Delaware, Texas or Wisconsin, it's time to end the gun lobby's tyranny over the law-- it's time to get rid of dangerous legislation that the majority of Americans don't want.

You know what else a whole lot of Americans didn't want? Desegregated schools and drinking fountains. It's too bad we have this bothersome Constitution that gets in the way.

Here's a great example of emotional appeal without a logical basis:

But what the gun lobby doesn't get, and what most Americans know, is that concealed weapons are dangerous anywhere. There's no reason to single out schools and churches-- if concealed weapons don't belong there, they don't belong anywhere on the streets.

Right. So, I have a great idea. Let make these things called guns illegal to carry concealed. Surely, if we make concealed carry of firearms illegal, crime will go down. After all, criminals already pay attention to laws outlawing murder. And rape. And drugs. And robbery.

If the legislature keeps concealed firearms out of the hands of responsible, licensed individuals, they will leave the citizenry defenseless against gun wielding criminals. Sure, you might wish that the guy robbing you doesn't have a gun, but chances are that his gun is illegal for him to possess anyway - he's not following the law regardless what it says.

Remember, he's robbing you, and robbery's been a crime for a long time. Better to have a gun than be defenseless.

Think about this:

About 1% of citizens who are allowed to carry a concealed firearm does. For every 100 people in a movie, about one of them will have a firearm. How often do you hear about accidental discharges of firearms in public? What about accidental discharges NOT by police officers? I can't think of one in recent memory.

I recognize that unattended, loaded firearms in the home do pose serious threats to children living there. The CDC's site shows that, in 2005, 75 children between the ages of 0 and 14 died of accidental firearm discharges. This is 75 too many, of course.

But let's compare for a moment. According to the same CDC site, in 2005, 810 children died as a result of fatal unintentional drownings in the United States. That's ten times as many. Do we hear a cry to outlaw bathtubs and pools?

Accidental suffocation deaths in 2005? 997. Outlaw pillows, blankets, and stuffed animals.

How about the CDC stat for unintentional motor vehicle deaths in 2005? 2,210.

Just think about it.

Legally Themed Racehorse Names

After fighting the good fight through an 8 hour ConLaw final, my brain is feeling a little stuffed.

It's time for some levity. I saw this post about legally themed race horse names up on Above the Law last night. They're really good for a laugh.

Some of my personal favorites from the comments:

Crazy Pro Se Plaintiff
Paper Chase
Void for Vagueness
Winning Brief
Collateral Estoppel
Hung Like a Jury
Scalito's Dissent

Some of my own:

Judicial Review
Executive Power
Future Interest
Dewey Cheetam & Howe
Express Preemption
Habeus Horses

How Free is the US?

The Economist weighs in (or, at least writes about another organization weighing in).

Chrsyler capping gas at $3/gallon if you buy one of their cars...

Good idea/bad idea? Definitely an interesting idea... Read up on it and post a thought.

24th Amendment.....by the wayside?

So, SCOTUS upheld the Indiana Voter ID law.

Slate has a very interesting take on this peculiar result.

I need to read this decision.

McCain: a Burkean?

That is the topic of this very cool debate over at Volokh. Follow the seven links at the end of the short first post.

A comment about men's store sales staff

In the spirit of the men's fashion part-motive Leo had for starting this blog, here's a short story...

I went to Jos. A. Bank today because some of the suits were 60% off, including a seersucker. I get there, and of course they don't have my size. I am a 38L (the Boss suit in my picture on the side is 38R though, and I'm close to that in other brands). I could probably even use the equivalent of a 37 sometimes. I am an odd size... 6'1", about 155lb, longish arms, etc. 

So what does the woman at the store tell me? Well, I start off in a 39, and she claims it too small! She has me go up to a 40. I was swimming in the 39, but it wasn't as bad as the 40, obviously. Shoulders were just a little big in the 39, and of course the problem got worse in the 40. What does she say? Yes, I need a 40! Tells me the lapel is supposed to lay flat on my chest, and it didn't do so in the 39 because it was too small. That's funny...all my other suits, suits that fit me, don't have that problem. 

How did we make the lapel lay flat on my chest in the 40. Well, instead of my shoulders back, chest out, proper posture I had on display when looking at the jacket in the mirror, she grabs the jacket by the lapel and pulls it forward. This made me look like Tessio from the Godfather - tall, gangly, round-shouldered - basically horrible. But hey, the lapels were now flat to the chest!

I said, "well, I don't think this fits. I prefer less fabric around the body, and much tighter in the shoulders. The shoulders are not going to wear well in this jacket." Of course I'm wrong... "Well, this is how it's supposed to fit." 

"Are you sure?" I said, knowing she is terribly wrong.

"Of course, I sell suits for a living."

------

Moral of the story to all 23 of our readers. Avoid salesmen, women, etc. like the plague. Read up about how suits are supposed to fit for your bodytype before you go to the store. Oh, and never shop at Jos. A. Bank. It really is a horrible store. Overpriced, bland, crappy suits, and foolish staff. Also, same holds true for Men's Warehouse. I've had two bad experiences there as well. They're just looking to sell you the suit, they don't really care how it looks.

World Gas Prices

World Gas Prices...

Most expensive places to buy gas
Rank	Country	Price/gal
1.	Bosnia-Herzegovina	$10.86
2.	Eritrea	$9.58
3.	Norway	$8.73
4.	United Kingdom	$8.38
5.	Netherlands	$8.37
6.	Monaco	$8.31
7.	Iceland	$8.28
8.	Belgium	$8.22
9.	France	$8.07
10.	Germany	$7.86
111.	United States	$3.45

Takings Debate over at Volokh

For those of us outlining and/or studying for Property, this battle may be of interest. Part of the case reminds me of one of the cases from Torts, I think it was the Milwaukee Insurance case (well, it was Milwaukee something, and I don't have my book - its the one where the police demolished a house looking for two suspects). Its cool when paragraphs like this one make sense, isn't it:

The Court's main argument is that there is no taking here under the Fifth Amendment because, when the government seizes property for use in a criminal investigation, it is exercising its "police power" (which, includes, among other things, law enforcement) not taking property for a "public use," as the text of the Amendment indicates. However, the Supreme Court has ruled in several cases (most notably Berman v. Parker and Hawaii Housing Authority v. Midkiff) that the scope of public use is "coterminous with the scope of a sovereign’s police powers" (Midkiff, 467 U.S. 229, 240-41 (1984)). I think that this is an overly broad interpretation of "public use," but it does clearly indicate that the mere fact that a government action involves the police power doesn't mean that it can't also be a taking for a public use. Thus the Federal Circuit is wrong to draw a sharp dichotomy between "public use" on the one hand and "police power" on the other.

Interesting Class Action Suit

Is this really an injury? I'd say not, especially since the company provided disclosure about the differences in capacity, etc., two years before the lawsuit. 

The necessary limits of, say, political correctness

Indian baby tossing 
I'm not saying this kind of thing should be made illegal,
but I do believe it must not be respected.