"Also: Is this Linda Greenhouse's swan song?"

I certainly hope so. One last bit of ego stroking for Justice Kennedy to encourage him to continue to throw a bone to the dark side.

It sounds like she's barely even trying anymore. It's just a list of the cases she found the most interesting. Clearly she's interested in employment litigation and found Ledbetter personally offensive.

Off to be hack-in-residence at Yale.

I'm glad that LVMH won. I'm tried of these poser associates with their fake Louie bags. If you don't have a trust fund and can't afford the bag, don't bother faking it. You make yourself look like a pathetic wannabe.

"In his majority opinion, Justice Antonin Scalia explicitly endorsed the wisdom of keeping a handgun in the home for self-defense. Such a weapon, he wrote, "is easier to store in a location that is readily accessible in an emergency; it cannot easily be redirected or wrestled away by an attacker; it is easier to use for those without the upper-body strength to lift and aim a long rifle; it can be pointed at a burglar with one hand while the other hand dials the police." But Scalia ignored a substantial body of public health research that contradicts his assertions. A number of scientific studies, published in the world's most rigorous, peer-reviewed journals, show that the risks of keeping a loaded gun in the home strongly outweigh the potential benefits."

Kellerman, where did Scalia's opinion make any attempt at comparison? Please explain how a list of potential benefits can be "contradicted" by a list of potential liabilities--what you mean is that you don't like the idea of people weighing each and coming to their own conclusions.

Asshole.

You don't seem to get it 10:09 - those poser associates are impersonating pathetic wannabees. That's the way they're supposed to look.

Too bad it's not possible to get visuals of all the gun lovers who comment on stories like this. Odds are they're short, fat, slow, ugly and stupid. In the war of all against all they'd be wiped out by some 15 year old from the inner city in the first twenty minutes. They need big government more than anyone, and yet they tear it down with a relentlessness that seems almost congenital. Just another example of "what's the matter with Kansas" I guess. So much for the power of cognitive dissonance.

10:19 is a 6'1", 178lb male, who's a bit under 30. He's at a V5 and came from HYS. Thanks for playing, 10:31.

If you look at the studies Kellerman cites to back up his argument, they only compare accidental accidents/deaths with the number of intruders who are shot are killed. This methodology fails to take into account the number of intruders who are scared away without being shot or who decide not to break in due to the risks that the homeowner may be armed.

http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcdgaga.html

If you look at the studies Kellerman cites to back up his argument, they only compare accidental accidents/deaths with the number of intruders who are shot are killed. This methodology fails to take into account the number of intruders who are scared away without being shot or who decide not to break in due to the risks that the homeowner may be armed.

http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcdgaga.html

"This methodology fails to take into account the number of intruders . . . who decide not to break in due to the risks that the homeowner may be armed."

>>>How do you propose that this be taken into account?

"In the war of all against all they'd be wiped out by some 15 year old from the inner city in the first twenty minutes."

>>>funny

I don't like guns.

I don't like irrational phobias.

Here's the deal then: you, on the Right, get over your irrational phobia about letting gay people get married/raise kids; you, on the Left, get over your irrational phobia about letting anyone who wants to carry a gun and who can pass licensing and background checks do so.

There, see how easy that is?

"In the war of all against all they'd be wiped out by some 15 year old from the inner city in the first twenty minutes."

In a gunfight? Not likely. Most inner-city youths can't shoot straight.

Bravo, 1:38.

Kellerman also includes suicides in the list of people harmed by guns in his studies. In fact, they are the vast majority of the people he counts. They shouldn't be included at all, because these people are intentionally using the gun on themselves. If there wasn't a gun around, they would have found some other way to kill themself.

The whole argument is screwed up anyway in that all gun accidents are the result of a gun owner that doesn't know how to properly store their gun and keep it away from children, etc.

1:38, the problem with your tradeoff is that about 70% of the population believe in an individual right to own a gun for self-defense, and about 70% of the population believe that gay marriage shouldn't be permitted. So under your scenario, one side would get the agreement from 30% of the population to let them have their guns, which they don't need because they already have 70% of the population behind them, in exchange for 70% of the population giving in to the 30% that want gay marriage. So, in effect, the 30% would be getting something for nothing.

2:56, fundamental rights aren't subject to democratic whims.

A real, robust right to keep and bear arms (i.e., anyone who wants to own and carry a handgun gets to if they can pass a reasonable background check and regular tests on skills and knowledge) is a fundamental right.

But it's hard to deny that the State has no business telling people who they can and cannot marry. That, too, is a fundamental right.

So you have a fundamental right to marry your cousin, congratulations.