Gun store Shooting Locations It is currently Fri Mar 29, 2024 6:16 am



Rules WGO Chat Room Gear Rent Me Shield NRA SAF CCKRBA
Calendar




Reply to topic  [ 26 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
 BULLETIN: SAF files notice of appeal in I-594 challenge 
Author Message
Site Admin
User avatar
Site Admin

Location: Olympia, WA
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2011
Posts: 38292
Real Name: Dan
Stokes wrote:
Being dismissive of the 18-20 year old issue is turning a lot of people off.

I want to believe that SAF has our best interest in mind. So much so, that I've been a supporter. But, stuff like this 'feels' like SAF would rather drag this stuff out (presumably for the maximum effect of fund raising and job security). I don't know if that's what's really going on, but that sentiment has been expressed by LOTS of folks in the circles I travel.


This... x1000


Wed Oct 28, 2015 8:04 am
Profile WWW
Site Supporter
User avatar
Site Supporter

Location: White Center
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2011
Posts: 6489
Massivedesign wrote:
Stokes wrote:
Being dismissive of the 18-20 year old issue is turning a lot of people off.

I want to believe that SAF has our best interest in mind. So much so, that I've been a supporter. But, stuff like this 'feels' like SAF would rather drag this stuff out (presumably for the maximum effect of fund raising and job security). I don't know if that's what's really going on, but that sentiment has been expressed by LOTS of folks in the circles I travel.


This... x1000


:yes:


Wed Oct 28, 2015 10:01 am
Profile
Site Supporter
User avatar
Site Supporter

Location: Ahead of the pack
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2011
Posts: 3434
Stokes wrote:
Being dismissive of the 18-20 year old issue is turning a lot of people off.

I want to believe that SAF has our best interest in mind. So much so, that I've been a supporter. But, stuff like this 'feels' like SAF would rather drag this stuff out (presumably for the maximum effect of fund raising and job security). I don't know if that's what's really going on, but that sentiment has been expressed by LOTS of folks in the circles I travel.

Many believe that SAF will only take on 'sure bet' lawsuits, and then will make sure to drag them as long and hard as they can. In the process, ramp up fund raisers, and in the end, get big settlements. I like the work Alan does, for the most part, but sometimes you gotta wonder why they don't get a quick kill on easy targets. SAF has become the defacto litigation outfit (especially with the consolidation of other RKBA groups) to fight bullshit gun control, but there is nothing that says they have to be the only ones. Like Dave says, if someone wants to make their own challenge, they're welcome to do so. So it does seem, there is a vacuum in this market. If it gets filled, I'd hope the RKBA is strengthened. But, since Alan has already built that machinery, it'd seem like a waste to create a new one.



Evidently you don't practice law or fight lawsuits in the court system.
Civil lawsuits grind slowly....thanks to "procedures" that drive us all nuts. I'm sure Alan would love to win cases quick and get them settled and so forth. But there are appeals, "procedures," delays, yada yada.

And everybody thinks he/she knows better than guys like Alan Gura how to run a strategic lawsuit.

The 594 case was kicked by the local court on the issue of "standing." That's a kind of catch-all excuse for not hearing a case. So, SAF appealed to the 9th Circuit, which will hopefully reverse and remand to Tacoma for the trial/hearing. Then the judge gets a certain amount of time to write and issue an opinion, then the losing side gets to appeal, then the winning side gets to respond to the appeal,

And if anybody thinks this is all engineered by SAF to make more money, they're nuts. SAF court actions and attorneys' fees cost a bundle. The alternative is to NOT take any of these issues to court, and instead let anti-gunners trample the 2A. Is THAT what you want? Maybe then some people could sit back and complain (they're good at that) about SAF "not doing anything to save our rights."

As I said earlier in this thread, if someone wants to file another lawsuit about 18-20 year olds, have at it. You might want to consult SAF so as not to interfere with the current case.

BTW: Not to be "dismissive" of the 18-20 year old issue, but there are stronger issues on which to fight this case. The 18-20 yr old issue obviously is your peeve. Find an attorney to take that case and go for it. Sniping at SAF for not putting that front and center in their case is not going to accomplish anything.

_________________
"The essential American soul is hard, isolate, stoic, and a killer." - D.H. Lawrence


Wed Oct 28, 2015 11:04 am
Profile
Site Supporter
User avatar
Site Supporter

Location: Olympia
Joined: Sat Oct 29, 2011
Posts: 16044
Real Name: Steve
I sent SAF some money for this. I'm also thinking about trying to get back 594 fees from the state via a civil suit, but haven't decided yet.

_________________
"I won't insult your intelligence by suggesting that you really believe what you just said." - William Buckley, Jr.

"...steam, artillery and revolvers give to civilized man an irresistible power." -Perry Collins


Wed Oct 28, 2015 1:07 pm
Profile
Site Supporter
User avatar
Site Supporter

Location: White Center
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2011
Posts: 6489
kf7mjf wrote:
I'm also thinking about trying to get back 594 fees from the state via a civil suit, but haven't decided yet.


That would be cool.


Wed Oct 28, 2015 1:26 pm
Profile
Site Supporter
User avatar
Site Supporter

Location: Olympia
Joined: Sat Oct 29, 2011
Posts: 16044
Real Name: Steve
Benja455 wrote:
kf7mjf wrote:
I'm also thinking about trying to get back 594 fees from the state via a civil suit, but haven't decided yet.


That would be cool.


Here we go. First you have to file a tort claim. http://des.wa.gov/SiteCollectionDocumen ... lforms.pdf

I need to go through my records and figure out what I've paid or discounted in 594 fees. It would be funny to see anyone that's paid an FFL for a transfer post 594 to file a tort claim.

_________________
"I won't insult your intelligence by suggesting that you really believe what you just said." - William Buckley, Jr.

"...steam, artillery and revolvers give to civilized man an irresistible power." -Perry Collins


Wed Oct 28, 2015 1:57 pm
Profile
Site Supporter
User avatar
Site Supporter

Location: 12 Acres in Eastern WA
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2012
Posts: 7251
Dave Workman wrote:
The 594 case was kicked by the local court on the issue of "standing." That's a kind of catch-all excuse for not hearing a case. So, SAF appealed to the 9th Circuit, which will hopefully reverse and remand to Tacoma for the trial/hearing.


Thanks Dave. Do you know when the 9th circuit will consider it for reverse/remand?

(given it was 4 months ago it was filed....)


Wed Oct 28, 2015 3:03 pm
Profile
Site Supporter
User avatar
Site Supporter

Location: N-Sno
Joined: Thu Oct 3, 2013
Posts: 4015
The 9th Circuit hasn't exactly been speedy on the Peruta case, so I wouldn't expect them to hustle this one through, either. I think it was over a year between the initial hearing of Peruta and the issuance of the first opinion. Discussions about whether or not an en banc hearing would even happen took something like 6 months.

_________________
"Hmmm. I've been looking for a way to serve the community that incorporates my violence." -- Leela


Wed Oct 28, 2015 3:11 pm
Profile
Site Supporter
User avatar
Site Supporter

Location: Oly
Joined: Thu Oct 4, 2012
Posts: 1330
Dave Workman wrote:

Evidently you don't practice law or fight lawsuits in the court system.
Civil lawsuits grind slowly....thanks to "procedures" that drive us all nuts. I'm sure Alan would love to win cases quick and get them settled and so forth. But there are appeals, "procedures," delays, yada yada.

And everybody thinks he/she knows better than guys like Alan Gura how to run a strategic lawsuit.

The 594 case was kicked by the local court on the issue of "standing." That's a kind of catch-all excuse for not hearing a case. So, SAF appealed to the 9th Circuit, which will hopefully reverse and remand to Tacoma for the trial/hearing. Then the judge gets a certain amount of time to write and issue an opinion, then the losing side gets to appeal, then the winning side gets to respond to the appeal,

And if anybody thinks this is all engineered by SAF to make more money, they're nuts. SAF court actions and attorneys' fees cost a bundle. The alternative is to NOT take any of these issues to court, and instead let anti-gunners trample the 2A. Is THAT what you want? Maybe then some people could sit back and complain (they're good at that) about SAF "not doing anything to save our rights."

As I said earlier in this thread, if someone wants to file another lawsuit about 18-20 year olds, have at it. You might want to consult SAF so as not to interfere with the current case.

BTW: Not to be "dismissive" of the 18-20 year old issue, but there are stronger issues on which to fight this case. The 18-20 yr old issue obviously is your peeve. Find an attorney to take that case and go for it. Sniping at SAF for not putting that front and center in their case is not going to accomplish anything.



Strike a nerve? I was expecting a bit more of an adult reaction, but if you need to appeal to authority and construct strawmen to make your logical fallacies, I'll make sure to promptly discount what you're saying.

You're assuming that I'm not a litigator (which is correct), and that's why I don't understand SAF's plan (that would be incorrect). I'll assume you've never ran a successful business (and I certainly could be wrong about that), because most successful business people have learned a bit about customer service. SAF is selling a product. Sometimes, you'll need to educate your customer base as to why your product is worth buying. They still run commercials for simple stuff like toilet paper, and we all buy it, so the real pros understand how communication with your audience is effective. If the 18-20YO or Single Issue challenges are dog shit, maybe you could explain why, as MANY of your customers believe they're pretty good challenges. Instead of telling us that we're fucking idiots for thinking so, and we should go shop somewhere else, maybe take a moment to communicate some stuff. After all, we might have the capacity to understand some of the 'procedures', yada yadas, and catch all excuses.

Sure... you don't want to broadcast your plan (is it really more than your filings?). I'd HOPE you're clever enough to get this kind of information out without compromising your case. That would be miles ahead of telling us to go pound sand. Maybe it's a tricky balance. Maybe you've run calculations on the sweet spot of Customer Relations vs. Secret Strategy. Maybe you just don't care, and would rather lash out at any 'sniping' (even if it wasn't really criticism).

There really is no need for you to reply, Dave. For now, Ill just quietly wait out this challenge and wait for the results. I'm hopeful they'll come back the way I want, and I can start supporting SAF more.


Tue Nov 03, 2015 3:31 pm
Profile
Site Supporter
User avatar
Site Supporter

Location: 12 Acres in Eastern WA
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2012
Posts: 7251
Wondering what happened to this appeal?


Sun May 21, 2017 7:30 pm
Profile
Site Supporter
User avatar
Site Supporter

Location: East of Japan, not by much.
Joined: Fri Jun 3, 2011
Posts: 12989
Well, two years later, only thing that has happened is more donations to SAF for........................... crickets.

_________________
Give a man a fish, and he will eat for a day. Give a man a fishing pole, and he will drink too much beer, get tangled in fish line, hook himself in the nose casting, fall overboard, and either drown, or, go home hungry and wet. Give a man a case of dynamite, and he will feed the whole town for a year!



BE ON NOTICE:
PRIVACY NOTICE: Warning - any person and/or institution and/or Agent and/or Agency of any governmental structure including but not limited to the United States Federal Government also using or monitoring/using this website or any of its associated websites, you do NOT have my permission to utilize any of my profile information nor any of the content contained herein including, but not limited to my photos, and/or the comments made about my photos or any other "picture" art posted on my profile.

You are hereby notified that you are strictly prohibited from disclosing, copying, distributing, disseminating, or taking any other action against me with regard to this profile and the contents herein. The foregoing prohibitions also apply to your employee, agent, student or any personnel under your direction or control.

The contents of this profile are PRIVATE and legally privileged and confidential information, and the violation of my personal privacy is punishable by law. UCC 1-103 1-308 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED WITHOUT PREJUDICE


Mon May 22, 2017 8:04 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 26 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 33 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum



Rules WGO Chat Room Gear Rent Me NRA SAF CCKRBA
Calendar


Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Designed by ST Software for PTF.
[ Time : 0.575s | 16 Queries | GZIP : Off ]