My former Cato Institute colleague Bob Levy is profiled by the Associated Press for his role in the challenge to the DC gun ban. One great thing about Levy is that he tells it like it is. As the article quotes: And Levy freely admits the case is manufactured, not one that bubbled up by chance from the district's steady flow of criminal cases involving guns. He wanted presentable plaintiffs to make a case for gun rights, not criminals. "We didn't want crack heads and bank robbers to be poster boys for the Second Amendment," he said. Is there a problem with this case being manufactured? I heard a talking head on the radio complaining a while ago that this case wasn't from real DC residents, that it was from outsiders. What's wrong with that? There may be some times that it takes an outsider to challenge an injustice or bad law. Did DC residents claim that Martin Luther King Jr. was an outsider who should have minded his own business? And about the case being ...
"No matter who says what, you should accept it with a smile and do your own work."--Mother Teresa (attributed)