 |
 |
It is currently Thu Apr 18, 2024 11:26 pm |
|
All times are UTC - 8 hours |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
Page 1 of 2 |
[ 26 posts ] | Go to page 1, 2 Next |
| Print view | Previous topic | Next topic |
BULLETIN: SAF files notice of appeal in I-594 challenge
| Author | Message |
|---|---|
|
Site Supporter   Location: Ahead of the pack Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2011 Posts: 3434 
|
BREAKING: SAF files notice of appeal in I-594 federal lawsuit
The Second Amendment Foundation filed a notice of appeal this morning with the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, the next step in its challenge to Initiative 594, the 18-page gun control and handgun registration scheme approved by voters in November, less than 24 hours after the Seattle P-I.com reported that the measure had “survived a federal court challenge.” http://www.examiner.com/article/breakin ... al-lawsuit IT'S FRIDAY!!!!!!  _________________ "The essential American soul is hard, isolate, stoic, and a killer." - D.H. Lawrence |
| Fri Jun 05, 2015 9:06 am |
|
|
|
|
Site Admin   Location: Olympia, WA Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2011 Posts: 38307 Real Name: Dan
|
So you guys are going after the "loan" issue, especially if Alan and his son are plaintiffs?
Armchair Lawyer - Why haven't you guys found an 18-20 year old adult who can now no longer buy a handgun? |
| Fri Jun 05, 2015 9:10 am |
|
|
|
|
Site Supporter Location: Ahead of the pack Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2011 Posts: 3434
|
Massivedesign wrote: So you guys are going after the "loan" issue, especially if Alan and his son are plaintiffs? Armchair Lawyer - Why haven't you guys found an 18-20 year old adult who can now no longer buy a handgun? Begging your pardon, but we've got good issues in the case as it stands. _________________ "The essential American soul is hard, isolate, stoic, and a killer." - D.H. Lawrence |
| Fri Jun 05, 2015 10:19 am |
|
|
|
|
Site Supporter  Location: Midwest Joined: Thu Oct 2, 2014 Posts: 8645
|
interesting
_________________ Massivedesign wrote: I am thinking of a number somewhere between none of and your business. |
| Fri Jun 05, 2015 11:05 am |
|
|
|
|
Site Supporter  Location: East of Japan, not by much. Joined: Fri Jun 3, 2011 Posts: 12990
|
Dave Workman wrote: Massivedesign wrote: So you guys are going after the "loan" issue, especially if Alan and his son are plaintiffs? Armchair Lawyer - Why haven't you guys found an 18-20 year old adult who can now no longer buy a handgun? Begging your pardon, but we've got good issues in the case as it stands. Oookaayyy - if you all feel like you have so air tight a case, why did it get blown out of Washington State court system so fast one could swear that Bloomburg had bought the judge off ? _________________ 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 |
| Fri Jun 05, 2015 11:18 am |
|
|
|
|
Site Supporter  Location: Olympia Joined: Sat Oct 29, 2011 Posts: 16044 Real Name: Steve
|
Because nobody had been charged with w crime and they seem obsessed with making this a federal case instead of challenging it on procedural and legal issues on a state level.
_________________ "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 |
| Fri Jun 05, 2015 11:21 am |
|
|
|
|
Site Supporter  Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2012 Posts: 7649
|
RENCORP wrote: Dave Workman wrote: Massivedesign wrote: So you guys are going after the "loan" issue, especially if Alan and his son are plaintiffs? Armchair Lawyer - Why haven't you guys found an 18-20 year old adult who can now no longer buy a handgun? Begging your pardon, but we've got good issues in the case as it stands. Oookaayyy - if you all feel like you have so air tight a case, why did it get blown out of Washington State court system so fast one could swear that Bloomburg had bought the judge off ? It did not. It was never in the state court system. It was in federal court. However, that said, I think we SHOULD litigate this in state court. Look at 695 from 1999. http://ballotpedia.org/Washington_Voter ... %281999%29 That initiative covered less subjects than 594, and was thrown out for violating the single subject rule. Yeah, there's a chance that the nutjob SCOWA that spewed the McCleary decision might uphold 594, but so what? We have little to lose, and possibly a lot to gain. Don't forget Chan. If we don't try it will still sit on the books. I will personally kick in another few hundred bucks if SAF launches a suit in state court. _________________ If you vote for Biden you are voting to be murdered when he sends Beto to come take your "semi automatic assault weapon" (any semi auto). If you have family or friends voting for Biden show them this and ask if they are willing to vote for your murder or maybe even their own if they are gun owners or live with any. https://nypost.com/2020/03/03/joe-biden ... n-control/ Quote: “I want to make something clear, I’m going to guarantee you this is not the last you’ve seen of him (Beto),” Biden said Monday evening during a campaign rally in Dallas. “You’re (Beto) going to take care of the gun problem with me. You’re (Beto) going to be the one who leads this effort.” https://www.newsweek.com/beto-orourke-g ... ns-1465738 Quote: [Beto O'Rourke Suggests Police Would 'Visit' Homes To Implement Proposed Assault Weapons Ban] "In that case, I think that there would be a visit by law enforcement to recover that firearm... ..."If someone does not turn in an AR-15 or an AK-47, one of these weapons of war...then that weapon will be taken from them" |
| Fri Jun 05, 2015 11:35 am |
|
|
|
|
Site Supporter Location: East of Japan, not by much. Joined: Fri Jun 3, 2011 Posts: 12990
|
Alpine wrote: RENCORP wrote: Dave Workman wrote: Massivedesign wrote: So you guys are going after the "loan" issue, especially if Alan and his son are plaintiffs? Armchair Lawyer - Why haven't you guys found an 18-20 year old adult who can now no longer buy a handgun? Begging your pardon, but we've got good issues in the case as it stands. Oookaayyy - if you all feel like you have so air tight a case, why did it get blown out of Washington State court system so fast one could swear that Bloomburg had bought the judge off ? It did not. It was never in the state court system. It was in federal court. However, that said, I think we SHOULD litigate this in state court. Look at 695 from 1999. http://ballotpedia.org/Washington_Voter ... %281999%29 That initiative covered less subjects than 594, and was thrown out for violating the single subject rule. Yeah, there's a chance that the nutjob SCOWA that spewed the McCleary decision might uphold 594, but so what? We have little to lose, and possibly a lot to gain. Don't forget Chan. If we don't try it will still sit on the books. I will personally kick in another few hundred bucks if SAF launches a suit in state court. Whupps, typing faster than I can think again - but apart from court jurisdiction, the case got tossed in nothing flat. Answers ? And, how many years will this drag on as a result of actions to date, or the lack thereof ? _________________ 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 |
| Fri Jun 05, 2015 11:40 am |
|
|
|
|
Site Admin Location: Olympia, WA Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2011 Posts: 38307 Real Name: Dan
|
Dave Workman wrote: Massivedesign wrote: So you guys are going after the "loan" issue, especially if Alan and his son are plaintiffs? Armchair Lawyer - Why haven't you guys found an 18-20 year old adult who can now no longer buy a handgun? Begging your pardon, but we've got good issues in the case as it stands. That's why I disclaimed "Armchair Lawyer". I would think that having a legal adult 18-20 would just be another nail in the coffin, multi faceted attack showing how ludicrous this law is from many angles. Is Alan's plan to completely overturn 594, or get the temporary transfer language defined and put to bed? |
| Fri Jun 05, 2015 12:48 pm |
|
|
|
|
Site Supporter  Location: 12 Acres in Eastern WA Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2012 Posts: 7251
|
Massivedesign wrote: Dave Workman wrote: Massivedesign wrote: So you guys are going after the "loan" issue, especially if Alan and his son are plaintiffs? Armchair Lawyer - Why haven't you guys found an 18-20 year old adult who can now no longer buy a handgun? Begging your pardon, but we've got good issues in the case as it stands. That's why I disclaimed "Armchair Lawyer". I would think that having a legal adult 18-20 would just be another nail in the coffin, multi faceted attack showing how ludicrous this law is from many angles. With an appeal I don't think they can add a "new" claim. So they are charging ahead with the existing original claim, trying to get it back into state court. I agree with you they missed some very obvious plaintiffs who actually had standing, and pretty rock solid claims like the 18-20 yo issue. But Alan is smarter than all of us put together, so we'll see how this goes. |
| Fri Jun 05, 2015 5:21 pm |
|
|
|
|
Site Supporter Location: Ahead of the pack Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2011 Posts: 3434
|
Nobody is trying to get this case "back into state court." the appeal to the 9th Circuit is to get it back to federal district court for a full hearing.
It's always been a federal issue because that's the best place for this. The lawsuit brings up several federal challenges. You're welcome to file another case over 18-20 year olds (might be interesting). Chat this over with an attorney. SAF filed a case with specific issues (federal courts don't like the everything-but-the-kitchen-sink approach, they like specific issues). _________________ "The essential American soul is hard, isolate, stoic, and a killer." - D.H. Lawrence |
| Fri Jun 05, 2015 6:57 pm |
|
|
|
|
Site Supporter Location: 12 Acres in Eastern WA Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2012 Posts: 7251
|
Dave Workman wrote: Nobody is trying to get this case "back into state court." My mistake. |
| Fri Jun 05, 2015 8:57 pm |
|
|
|
|
Site Supporter Location: 12 Acres in Eastern WA Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2012 Posts: 7251
|
Dave - what is the status of this appeal?
|
| Wed Oct 28, 2015 5:53 am |
|
|
|
|
Site Supporter  Location: Marysville, WA Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2011 Posts: 11581 Real Name: Mike
|
Dave Workman wrote: Nobody is trying to get this case "back into state court." the appeal to the 9th Circuit is to get it back to federal district court for a full hearing. It's always been a federal issue because that's the best place for this. The lawsuit brings up several federal challenges. You're welcome to file another case over 18-20 year olds (might be interesting). Chat this over with an attorney. SAF filed a case with specific issues (federal courts don't like the everything-but-the-kitchen-sink approach, they like specific issues). Just curious. Don't our courts and the appeal system require a "harmed party" before you can seek relief? Who is/are these "harmed parties" or is the suit merely moving on to the next level claiming someone MIGHT be harmed. I don't like the law any more than the rest here (except perhaps Anzac  ) but isn't a lot of money being wasted with the high likelihood of the same result?_________________ "I've learned from the Dog that an afternoon nap is a good thing" ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "For he to-day that sheds his blood with me Shall be my brother" - William Shakespeare |
| Wed Oct 28, 2015 7:08 am |
|
|
|
|
Site Supporter  Location: Oly Joined: Thu Oct 4, 2012 Posts: 1341
|
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. |
| Wed Oct 28, 2015 7:39 am |
|
|
|
|
|
Page 1 of 2 |
[ 26 posts ] | Go to page 1, 2 Next |
|
All times are UTC - 8 hours |
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 53 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 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|