It’s
not
surprising
that
a
Trump
judge
would
strike
down
a
gun
regulation.
Republican
judges
do
that
all
the
time.
Between
Heller
and
Bruen,
there’s
now
a
collection
of
boilerplate,
ahistorical
gibberish
that
judges
can
cite
so
they
can
hem
and
haw
about
the
“grave
seriousness”
of
the
threat
but
then
strike
down
the
law
as
overbroad
anyway,
no
matter
how
narrowly
tailored
it
might
be.
You
might
think
it
should
be
illegal
to
have
that,
but
the
original
public
meaning
says
the
Founding
Fathers
EXPECTED
your
neighbor
to
own
a
rocket-propelled
grenade
launcher!
It’s
dumb,
but
it’s
all
part
of
the
game.
Judge
Stephen
McGlynn
does
not
understand
that
game:
Why
are
there
small
lifeboats
on
gigantic
steel
ocean
liners?
Why
do
we
spend
thousands
equipping
our
vehicles
with
airbags?
Why
do
we
wear
seatbelts
and
place
our
infants
in
safety
seats?
Why
do
we
build
storm
shelters
under
our
homes?
Why
do
we
install
ground-fault
interrupter
outlets
by
sinks
and
bathtubs?
Why
do
we
get
painful
inoculations?
Why
do
we
voluntarily
undergo
sickening
chemotherapy?And
why
do
we
protect
ourselves
with
firearms?
This
is
how
he
began
a
168-page
opinion.
He
sat
down
and
thought,
“I’m
going
to
come
up
with
some
brilliant
analogies!”
and
then
decided
to
OPEN
the
opinion
with
this.
Which,
in
some
ways,
you’ve
got
to
appreciate
because
168
pages
is
a
lot
and
it’s
nice
that
he
broadcast
that
this
wouldn’t
amount
to
a
work
of
serious
legal
thought
right
off
the
top.
Why
are
there
small
lifeboats
in
gigantic
steel
ocean
liners?
Because
sometimes
they
sink.
But
—
and
I
can’t
stress
this
part
enough
—
when
the
cruise
ship
isn’t
sinking,
no
one
uses
lifeboats
to
assassinate
kindergartners.
Child
safety
seats
and
airbags
have
tragically
cost
children’s
lives
in
the
past
and
we’ve
reworked
how
we
use
them
because
of
it.
But
those
were
still
instances
of
the
safety
device
not
working
properly
and
not
people
using
airbags
as
a
weapon
of
destruction.
“And
why
do
we
protect
ourselves
with
firearms?”
First
of
all,
the
meaning
of
“protect
ourselves”
is
stretched
to
the
breaking
point
here.
The
law
at
issue,
The
Protect
Illinois
Communities
Act,
banned
new
sales
of
AR-15s
and
required
existing
owners
to
register
their
rifle
with
the
state
police.
Cue
the
eerie
music
and
imagine
walking
home
from
your
office
one
night,
hearing
a
strange
noise
behind
you,
and
reaching
into
your
computer
bag
to
pull
out
your
self-defense…
military-grade
longarm
rifle?
There’s
a
reasonable
policy
argument
that
the
fixation
on
AR-15s
is
misplaced
because
handguns
do
far
more
death
and
destruction
on
a
day-by-day
scale,
but
at
least
with
a
handgun
there’s
a
non-ludicrous
self-defense
hypothetical.
AR-15
regulations
are
a
politically
easy
lift
given
the
profound
lack
of
any
serious
civilian
use
case
for
the
weapon
beyond
killing
children
and
compensating
male
inadequacy.
Its
proponents
call
it
the
modern
sporting
rifle
even
though
you’re
hard-pressed
to
find
someone
crouching
in
a
blind
waiting
to
blow
away
a
deer
with
an
AR-15
as
opposed
to
some
bolt-action
rifle
or
—
if
they’re
really
hard
—
a
bow
and
arrow.
The
consumer-grade
version
of
America’s
default
military
rifle
is
one
of
the
most
popular
gun
purchases
because,
like
the
old
Hummer,
there’s
a
class
of
guys
(and
it’s
overwhelmingly
guys)
who
will
buy
cloned
military
gear
so
they
can
play
make-believe
with
their
buddies
instead
of
facing
life
as
a
terminally
out-of-shape
insurance
adjuster.
“SEAL
Team
Sucks,”
if
you
will.
They
may
not,
in
the
aggregate,
kill
as
many
as
the
overwhelmingly
supply
of
handguns
on
the
streets,
but
banning
AR-15s
presents
an
easy,
narrowly
tailored
regulation
that
fits
squarely
within
the
Second
Amendment’s
text
inviting
states
to
regulate
weapons
that
could
be
used
in
war.
Too
often,
the
perils
we
face
are
forced
upon
us
by
other
people.
By
people
who
are
negligent,
reckless,
insane,
impaired,
or
evil.
Sometimes
it
is
the
proverbial
lone
wolf;
sometimes,
it
is
the
whole
wolf
pack.
Truly,
life
comes
at
you
quickly.And
who
comes
to
our
aid
in
times
of
peril?
Sometimes,
it
is
the
police
or
first
responders;
other
times
it
is
healthcare
professionals;
and
sometimes
it
is
family,
friends,
or
neighbors.
Sometimes,
it
is
no
one.
“Sometimes,
it
is
no
one.”
The
Uvalde
police
did
nothing
while
a
gunman
strolled
the
halls
of
a
school
gunning
down
kids
because
the
police
did
not
feel
equipped
to
handle
a
guy
with
an
AR-15.
It
isn’t
advancing
the
judge’s
case
that
the
AR-15
provides
the
last
line
of
defense
when
no
one
else
can
help
when
the
AR-15
is
the
reason
no
one
else
will
help.
What
the
hell
is
this?
This
illustration
posits
the
question
on
the
top
line,
written
in
German,
“[w]hich
two
animals
are
most
like
each
other?”
Beneath
the
image
are
the
words
“[R]abbit
and
duck.”
The
image
distinguishes
perception
from
interpretation.
If
you
see
only
a
duck,
your
interpretation
of
the
data
is
too
narrow.
Yet
once
you
become
aware
of
the
duality
of
the
image,
your
interpretation
of
the
data
allows
you
to
see
both
a
duck
and
a
rabbit.
I
see
only
a
jackass.
Put
aside
the
constitutionality
of
it
all,
this
is
just
sophomoric
legal
writing.
There
are
clerks
who
are
going
to
come
out
of
these
chambers
and
employers
should
be
very
cautious
about
assuming
they’ve
learned
even
rudimentary
writing
skills
from
this
ding
dong.
And
any
law
students
eyeing
a
federal
clerkship
should
consider
whether
hitching
their
reputation
to
this
guy
is
a
shot
in
the
arm
or
an
albatross.
Because
we’re
already
entering
an
era
where
“federal
clerkship”
isn’t
the
automatic
chit
it
once
was.
“Guns
are
a
lot
like
airbags,
no,
no,
maybe
they’re
like
storm
shelters…
hey,
do
you
see
a
candlestick
or
two
faces?”
isn’t
the
opening
of
a
court
opinion,
it’s
a
deleted
scene
from
Forrest
Gump.
But
again,
perhaps
it’s
for
the
best
that
this
inevitable
blip
in
the
nation’s
constitutional
order
will
be
marked
by
caselaw
like
this.
When
the
time
comes
to
dismantle
this
garbage
line
of
reasoning
—
wholly
at
odds
with
the
nation’s
history
and
tradition
of
gun
regulation
from
before
the
Founding
until
Heller
—
we’re
going
to
appreciate
that
it
rests
on
powerful
legal
reasoning
like
“Why
are
there
small
lifeboats
on
gigantic
steel
ocean
liners?”
Truly
the
second
coming
of
Learned
Hand
over
here.
(Opinion
on
the
next
page…)
Joe
Patrice is
a
senior
editor
at
Above
the
Law
and
co-host
of
Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer.
Feel
free
to email
any
tips,
questions,
or
comments.
Follow
him
on Twitter or
Bluesky
if
you’re
interested
in
law,
politics,
and
a
healthy
dose
of
college
sports
news.
Joe
also
serves
as
a
Managing
Director
at
RPN
Executive
Search.