Things Inside My Head.

 Here's a quick snapshot of what's inside me noggin this morning, in no particular order:

1.  I plan to ask for a kosher meal at today's FBA luncheon.

2.  It's almost worse that Con Law Perfesser Obama legitimized Gitmo, indefinite detention, and military tribunals than it is that "rancher" George W. Bush instituted these Constitutional aberrations in the first place.

3.  Could Johnny Storm really be dead?

4.  I totally agree with Andrei Codrescu on NPR the other day about defacing my new e-book with some "crowdsourced" idiocracy contest regarding highlights:

And this thing on my Kindle is supposed to be new. And then I discovered that the horror doesn't stop with the unwelcomed presence of another reader who's defaced my new book. But it deepens with something called view popular highlights, which will tell you how many morons have underlined before so that not only you do not own the new book you paid for, the entire experience of reading is shattered by the presence of a mob that agitates inside your text like strangers in a train station.

 5.  Dan Le Batard may finally have to blame someone I've never seen him identify before as being responsible for anything negative, ever -- the players.

6.  Wes Parsons was only hoping to lose the latest citrus canker trial by $3 million, but instead lost by $12 million (plus fees and substantial interest), but what's $10 or so million between friends:

"I was hoping for the amount of compensation already paid, which was around $3 million."

Question -- wasn't there a defense on liability too?

7.  This post is starting to resemble Greg Cote.

(Note -- no offense, but I have met Greg Cote).

"Why Can't You Carry A Gun Into a Federal Building"?

That's just one provocative question raised by Nina Totenberg on NPR this morning, as she previews arguments in the Chicago handgun case to be heard by The Supremes today:

The odds are that gun advocates will win this case. The Supreme Court's groundbreaking 2008 decision was by a 5-4 vote, with conservatives in the majority. But now the question is whether a right declared fundamental by the court can be isolated as a federal right only — a proposition that liberals generally have not favored.

And if gun advocates do win this case, expect a torrent of other cases, some already in the pipeline, that test a huge array of existing gun regulations — everything from laws banning concealed weapons to those banning the carrying of weapons in public without a permit, and laws that issue a carry permit only upon a showing of good cause or necessity.

Then there are laws that limit the number of guns that can be purchased at one time; laws that ban assault weapons; laws that ban hunting rifles with optical sights in urban areas; laws that require guns to be trigger-locked or stored in a locked container — even a new California law that requires handguns to micro-stamp each cartridge when fired with the serial number of the gun.

All of those laws could be in jeopardy, and more, depending on how the Supreme Court rules.

Listen, I know some federal courts where you can't carry in a cellphone, let alone a pistol.

And, for whatever reason, no audio transcripts of the oral argument will be made available, so you can forget any YouTube mashups on this one.

Argument begins at 10 a.m.

DKRPA.COM

Who is that British guy on WLRN who keeps interrupting All Things Considered during afternoon drive-time to prattle on about "30 years of collective experience" and "investor losses"?

Are you guys sure you want Robert Morley as the face of the firm?

(On second thought, don't answer that.)