PDA

View Full Version : Santa Maria update


Glock22Fan
08-14-2008, 10:57 PM
For those interested, Chief Macagni's deposition will start on August 28th. The court case, expected to take around three days, has been scheduled for November 18th, 2008. (Sorry, I originally posted the wrong date).

Even more interesting, Bruce (the finest law enforcement defense litigator in the country) Praet wanted to put the deposition off until next year. The judge refused this request, implying that it was a straightforward enough case that it should be heard soon.

In future, I will be limiting my posts regarding TBJ to straight announcements (such as this) and informational replies to genuine questions (such as the one in a recent post concerning Billy Jack's attitude to the SFPD policy). Do not regard my future failure to respond to attacks as inability so to do; it just gets boring repeating the same things over and over to people who will not, or cannot, understand them. Anyone unbiased who wants the straight poop should contact me off-line.

Paladin
08-14-2008, 11:44 PM
For those interested, Chief Macagni's deposition will start on August 28th.IIRC, when that former Sacto sheriff was deposed a year or so ago (Blanas?), a video of it ended up on the web. Could you guys video Macagnis' depo and put it up on YouTube/Google/your site?

The court case, expected to take around three days, has been scheduled for November 28th.Unfortunately, for now, for those of us who long for "Shall Issue" (or, even better, VT Carry) the best we can hope for is putting the hurt on the major urban anti CLEOs via TBJ lawsuits. It doesn't really help the avg Joe get a CCW, but I kinda of view as if some of the serfs were sticking pitch forks into the butts of some of the nobility. :43:

I wish you guys the best.

Glock22Fan
08-15-2008, 8:13 AM
It doesn't really help the avg Joe get a CCW

If we can get the court to tell a chief/sheriff to stop his/her restrictive practices, and this can be enforced (perhaps with a second lawsuit, a la Heller, then yes it will help the average Joe.

Paladin
08-15-2008, 8:27 AM
If we can get the court to tell a chief/sheriff to stop his/her restrictive practices, and this can be enforced (perhaps with a second lawsuit, a la Heller, then yes it will help the average Joe.When I'm talking about the "average Joe," I'm talking about someone who at best can claim as a GC to be an "avid shooter" who a few times a month "carries valuable firearms" to and from a range (something that BJ seemed to disparage in his recent blog).

Not trying to restart the debate of the other thread, just trying to clarify what I mean when I speak of an "average [CGN] Joe."

Glock22Fan
08-15-2008, 9:13 AM
No, it isn't going to force the likes of Baca to become as free issuing as in, say, Kern County, but it should help lots of people who fall somewhere in between the "Personal Defense" and the "I'm very important, and here's a megabunch of money" crowd.

People like battered women (or men) with TRO's. Should be able to get a CCW, often can't. People whose jobs put them at risk - doctors, rent collectors, cab drivers, pizza delivery drivers etc. etc. We all know that people with a need get rejected all the time, because the bar is set impossibly high. We hope to change that.

Glock22Fan
08-15-2008, 10:19 AM
For those who want a video, we'd love to do this but it costs a lot of money (you are talking about three days cameraman's salary, plus other costs). and doesn't forward our client's case - so you can't really expect him to pay for that.

If there's a sugar daddy out there willing to pay for all that, please get in touch with us.

Glock22Fan
08-15-2008, 12:51 PM
Sorry, my bad, but I posted the wrong trial date above. The actual date should read November 18th, 2008. I have corrected it there, and restate it here for those who skip to the end.

CCWFacts
08-15-2008, 4:30 PM
When I'm talking about the "average Joe," I'm talking about someone who at best can claim as a GC to be an "avid shooter" who a few times a month "carries valuable firearms" to and from a range (something that BJ seemed to disparage in his recent blog).

Right, that's what I mean when I say "average Joe" also. Someone whose GC is "personal protection" or some thinly padded "personal protection" like "I transport guns to the range" or "I have to drive through dangerous areas sometimes". These are GCs that could apply to basically everyone. 95% of the people interested in CCWs fall into this "average Joes" group, of people who have either no GC beyond personal protection, or a "thinly padded" variant of personal protection. That's the group I care about getting CCWs for.

As an intermediate step, getting CCWs for people like taxi drivers and pizza deliverers is great too. But to me, if it stops there, it's a defeat.

Glock22Fan
08-15-2008, 4:54 PM
The way to eat an elephant is one bite at a time. Some people look at the small hole that you have made on day 1 and say "This is never going to work," but with enough people and enough days, one bite at a time will inevitably reduce the elephant to a pile of bones.

Knauga
08-15-2008, 6:40 PM
We've lost most of our gun rights in this state one bite at a time, we are going to have to get them back one bite at a time.

Paladin
08-15-2008, 6:47 PM
For those who want a video, we'd love to do this but it costs a lot of money (you are talking about three days cameraman's salary, plus other costs). and doesn't forward our client's case - so you can't really expect him to pay for that.

If there's a sugar daddy out there willing to pay for all that, please get in touch with us.I wasn't talking about professional quality, but rather about just setting a home video camera on a table a few feet away. After the 3 days, you'll know where the "high lights" of the event are and just edit those together and post on YouTube.

pnkssbtz
08-15-2008, 6:57 PM
Right, that's what I mean when I say "average Joe" also. Someone whose GC is "personal protection" or some thinly padded "personal protection" like "I transport guns to the range" or "I have to drive through dangerous areas sometimes". These are GCs that could apply to basically everyone. 95% of the people interested in CCWs fall into this "average Joes" group, of people who have either no GC beyond personal protection, or a "thinly padded" variant of personal protection. That's the group I care about getting CCWs for.

As an intermediate step, getting CCWs for people like taxi drivers and pizza deliverers is great too. But to me, if it stops there, it's a defeat.Wait a minute... please explain how someone's need for personal protection is less than another's?

Having being fat, ugly, having $3,500 cash in my pocket and driving a honda civic is more justification for obtaining a CCW than being young, female and very attractive driving a $35,000 vehicle?

Paladin
08-16-2008, 7:04 AM
Sorry, my bad, but I posted the wrong trial date above. The actual date should read November 18th, 2008. I have corrected it there, and restate it here for those who skip to the end.Marked on my calendar. Many of us early look forward to the outcome of this, not just re. the specific damages awarded, but also for its impact on other CLEOs practice.

May this be the first of a long line of successes for TBJ against the corrupt, hard-core anti urban CLEOs.

zok
08-16-2008, 7:24 AM
I have a feeling, that this will end as soon as the deposition is complete on the Chief. I do not think Santa Maria will want there dirty laundry out.

Fun Time.......

motorhead
08-16-2008, 9:42 AM
thx for fighting the good fight. every small victory is...a victory.

n6nvr
08-17-2008, 4:56 AM
Based on the few depositions I've made or sat in on, I can't see both sides in any case agreeing to a video of a deposition, ESPECIALLY after you say you want to edit it down to the highlights. One side (at least) is going to say hell NO.

Somehow the analogy that comes to mind is making sausage.

Paladin
08-17-2008, 9:06 AM
Based on the few depositions I've made or sat in on, I can't see both sides in any case agreeing to a video of a deposition, ESPECIALLY after you say you want to edit it down to the highlights. One side (at least) is going to say hell NO.

Somehow the analogy that comes to mind is making sausage.For anyone who missed it the first time it was posted, the edited highlights of former Sac. Co. Sheriff Blanas deposition re. possible illegal CCW issuance:
http://videos.sacbee.com/vmix_hosted_apps/p/media?id=1601130