re: #291 wrenchwench

You assert they have a biased view on this bill given the pro life positions. That is an assumption right?

How are we to dismiss legal expertise in legal matters out of hand? Shall we ignore doctors advice about drugs?

When we need to learn something about the law, even the police turn to legal experts. The ACLU has a stable of such. They do some great work with their expertise. When self defense classes undertake the lessons of allowable legal force to be used, an expert, like a prosecutor or DA (always lawyers right?) are brought in. So I can’t really just dismiss them out of hand as no better than you or I-Less trained and experienced in that law.

For a legal opinion, one would not be wise to listen too carefully to those who do not understand law. If a person who would become impacted becomes an expert on that law, that’s legit and similar to many including myself in use of force laws. (Trained by a prosecutor and defense atty.)

But absent the legal study it’s a personal opinion not a legal one. Even strong personal opinions are to be taken with care until the law is better studied by legal experts. After all what other kind of expert has merit in a legal question?

Our President is respected with his constitutional law scholar status, so his opinion on constitutional matters has more weight than that of GWB, and those affected by say commerce clause rulings against them.

Do you not think it possible the laws impact was seized upon by advocates beyond it’s actual language? We have seen this happen before frequently. So please forgive my reluctance to instantly dismiss the contention.