Amicus brief in Emerson case

[Brett Bellmore]

An amicus brief has been filed in the Emerson case by the "Potomac Institute", an organization which PRETENDS to be this vast think tank, but which is really a hobby run by a nutbar (You pegged him, DC!) named Ernest McGill. (It's hard to find that out, 'cause he goes by a pseudonym, "GEErnst", and deletes all posts to his site which include his real name.

Now, we really don't want the court hearing the appeal of Judge Cumming's ruling to be influenced by a madman, do we? And believe me, Ernest IS a madman, as anyone who's had any significant interaction with him can testify. Perhaps more to the point, though, he's an ANTI-GUN madman, and we've got the opportunity to direct one of the anti-gun amicus briefs to the circular file here.

I'm asking everyone who has had personal experience with McGill, aka "GEErnst", and his phony "institute", to drop a line to the Fifth circuit court of appeals, and let them know what the "Potomac Institute" REALLY is. Because right now they probably believe it's a real think tank! I'll edit in their email and postal addresses later, when I've looked them up, but they're easy enough to find on the web.

Let's go to work, and TRASH this nutcase!

 

[bookkie]

Brett:

As you know, I'm one of the posters (harrassors)(Strider) on GEErnst's board. To everyone else, I can attest that GEErnst is a true nut case. In debates his only argument is to read the files on his site. These files show nothing to support his position, rather they attack every one who is opposed to his view. After reading GEE's amicus I'm convinced that the court will see through it.

No, I'm not concerned with GEE's amicus. At this point I'm more concerned with the amicus's that will be filed for our side. Will they do an good job? or will they blow it and file something like GEE's? I just hope someone will answer the 60 years of presidence filed by the pros. I just hope that someone will show the early court cases upholding the 2nd. Will lay out and explain Dread Scott, Presser & the rest.... I am really anxious to read what Holbrook comes up with for the court, as it is my understanding he plans on filing an amicus.

I would much rather see the people here write the court, requesting that they give an honest reading. Let them know that we are watching and are judging the court based upon their ruling. Is the court going to be legitimate and rule based upon the intent of the lawmakers, or are they going to be considered illigitimate by basing their decision on their personal feelings and bias. Letting the court know how important it is at this time that the SC give us some guidence. I would like to see each one of us here contact our representatives and request that they pressure the SC to hear this case, reguardless of how the 5th rules.



------------------
Richard

The debate is not about guns,
but rather who has the ultimate power to rule,
the People or Government.
RKBA!

 

[Brett Bellmore]

Well, Bookie, I don't think it's likely the court will be impressed with McGill's amicus either; But why take the chance, when we can knock down one of the opposition's briefs before it's even been seriously considered? I'm a belt AND suspenders man, myself, and this is too important to take chances on.

As for writing the court, asking them to issue an honest ruling in this case, I'm not too sure it's really a good idea to phrase it that way! That's an accurate way to put it, but telling the court that we're concerned that they might rule in bad faith will NOT endear us to them! A tack I'd suggest is to simply point out that US v. Miller, the case most of the government's precedents rest on, was a trial in abstentia, and so the SC had had no opportunity to address any of the issues which might have been raised by the defense if there had actually BEEN a defense! So, in the interest of justice, would they please forgo issuing a ruling based on this dubious precedent, and tackle all the issues raised by Emerson's defense team and the allied amicus briefs?

By the way, I certainly hope that all our amicus briefs have ALREADY been filed, as the deadline passed about a week ago!

------------------
Sic semper tyranus!

[This message has been edited by Brett Bellmore (edited September 09, 1999).]

 

[DC]

Just a bit more on Ernest...
Aside from the fact that he is rabidly anti-gun its important to note why he is so anti-gun. Ernest McGill believes in big controlling government with absolute power...further, he believes, thusly that people are subjects of the government, not vice versa. Even more, incredulously, he believes that big government is incapable of abuse and evil....those are mere glitches and get smoothed out over time. Because, by its inherent nature, government is benevolent, it simply can not act in fashions harmful to its subject citizens.
He is so rabidly anti-gun because he knows that an armed citizenry can resist his benevolent monolithic government

------------------
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes" RKBA!

 

[Brett Bellmore]

And THAT, by the way, is why it's so important to get this amicus knocked out right away; That position, while it strikes US as proof that Ernest is deranged, is not necessarilly going to sound crazy to someone who WORKS FOR THE GOVERNMENT.

------------------
Sic semper tyranus!

 

[Brett Bellmore]

Incidentally, "GEErnst" is now royally pissed at me; The court sent him, or his attorney, (Likely one and the same, in my opinion.) a copy of my email. He posted it at his site, with his real name deleted, of course, and numerous angry insertions.

No word from Ernest, though, on whether or not the court was actually concerned about what I had to say, or whether it had any impact on the acceptance of his brief. He DID, however, dare all and sundry to send similar letters to the court! Is anyone else interested in taking up the dare?

------------------
Sic semper tyranus!

 

[DC]

Brett...

I forwarded Ernie's forum response to you...unaltered....to the Court; with navigational directions on how to reach his forum. I recommended that they clarify any questions about his amicus by studying at his forum.

*evil grin*

------------------
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes" RKBA!

 

[Brett Bellmore]

Thanks for the aid, DC. You know, I think the funniest part is Ernest's parting shot about how he, "GEErnst", doesn't want to see any pseudonyms on his board! Of course, he deleted my post pointing out that little inconsistency.

------------------
Sic semper tyranus!