PDA

View Full Version : Nordykes didn't really lose, and here's why


wcnones
04-20-2009, 1:30 PM
I posted this in the big and ever-growing Nordyke thread, and I think it is important to post this thought here because the sheer size of the thread relegates most individual posts within it to obscurity.

I read the opinion, and the Nordykes lost on their appeal, but have a very valid and defensible position in petitioning the county a second time for use of the fairgrounds for a gun show.

The Scottish re-enactors navigated around the ordinance by showing that their rifles could not be used for violent acts while on county property. Specifically, they showed that because they use blanks, their weapons are incapable of firing rounds and injuring visitors of the fairgrounds.

The Nordykes can show the same. As organizers of the event, they can dictate the rules of those attending, including vendors. If they petition to use the fairgrounds, but this time show that no violence can take place because of the following restrictions, the county cannot deny the petition without subjecting itself to violating the court's logic in the Nordyke opinion:

1. Require that each firearm be incapable of firing a round while on county property. Each vendor must lock any weapon present such that no one can fire the weapon until it is unlocked.

2. Require that visitors either be forbidden from carrying firearms while at the show, or require that any privately owned firearms is locked with a device at the show gates that only show employees can remove when the private visitors leaves the show.

3. If a person purchases a C&R firearm from a show vendor, and if the C&R is eligible for cash and carry, the cash part takes place on show grounds, and the carry part takes place off of county property. Show organizers can implement a "C&C Trolly" that transports sold C&R weapons from county property to private property, and the purchasers simply travels to that private property and do the carry part there. Hell, this could be across the street, and the "C&R Trolly" could do this once each hour.

This follows the same reasoning used by the Scottish Re-enactors and prevents the same harm that the legislation is claimed to curb. If the county denies this, the Nordykes can challenge on the grounds of preferential treatment and/or inequitable execution of laws.

DDT
04-20-2009, 1:37 PM
It may be much simpler than that. The court denied them the right to add the 2A claim to their original complaint. If they apply for another permit and are denied another whole separate lawsuit can be filed based on the 2A violation.

wcnones
04-20-2009, 1:44 PM
If they petition after restricting the presence of unlocked firearms, and are denied, they get the added benefit of showing that the county is simply discriminating against a particular culture (the "gun culture" as the opinion refers to it) and force the court to address the inappropriate and restrictive laws that the state imposes on law abiding citizens that the state has a difference of opinions with...after all, isn't that what we want in a judicial ruling? Don't we want to stop fighting the peripheral issues (such as denied permits) and instead defeat the heart of the matter, which is one political stripe passing laws to deny a competing political stripe the full enjoyment of our Constitutional liberties? Once that battle is won, there is little the state can do without coloring itself as inequitable and unjustly self-serving....

E Pluribus Unum
04-20-2009, 3:40 PM
If they petition after restricting the presence of unlocked firearms, and are denied, they get the added benefit of showing that the county is simply discriminating against a particular culture (the "gun culture" as the opinion refers to it) and force the court to address the inappropriate and restrictive laws that the state imposes on law abiding citizens that the state has a difference of opinions with...after all, isn't that what we want in a judicial ruling? Don't we want to stop fighting the peripheral issues (such as denied permits) and instead defeat the heart of the matter, which is one political stripe passing laws to deny a competing political stripe the full enjoyment of our Constitutional liberties? Once that battle is won, there is little the state can do without coloring itself as inequitable and unjustly self-serving....

If this is done, we run the risk of opening the door to a less-conservative panel and that panel through creative wording, undercutting the favorable result.

Don't forget that the reason we came out favorable on this one as opposed to Silveria and the many other gun lawsuits that have gone the other way is this unique panel.

I think we were tied at the 2 minute warning in the fourth quarter. Our defense sacked them in their inzone and we got a safety. Now we have the ball back on the 50 yard line. Why throw hail mary passes that could backfire? We need to sit tight and run the ball.

There are other issues that should be tackled like CCW/Open carry. We now have a fundamental individual right to possess firearms for personal protection. In the end, the state may be able to restrict concealed carry, but they will have a choice- let us carry them concealed, or we carry them openly, loaded.

bulgron
04-20-2009, 3:48 PM
At the end of the day, it's up to the Nordykes what they will do next regarding appeals.

But if this ruling stands, they can ban gun shows at the Cow Palace. If we want gun shows in the future in this state, we need to turn this loss into a win, somehow.

Liberty1
04-20-2009, 4:34 PM
All those attending could become "participants" in the event by joining the "organization" at the gate and can then handle the firearms in the "event".

Theseus
04-20-2009, 5:50 PM
The real problem here is that the circumstances are still ambiguous.

But as pointed out, I believe the answer says they need to go back and use the 2A argument and that might be the answer.

SimpleCountryActuary
04-20-2009, 9:29 PM
At the end of the day, it's up to the Nordykes what they will do next regarding appeals.

But if this ruling stands, they can ban gun shows at the Cow Palace. If we want gun shows in the future in this state, we need to turn this loss into a win, somehow.

They COULD ban gun shows at the Cow Palace. Will they? Will they when you can have the gun show at the biggest hotel in town instead and there ain't nothing to stop you?

Why am I speaking in questions?

They thought they could stop all gun shows as the next step to taking our guns. They are now stopped unless the Supreme Court intervenes. They will want the revenue so they will allow the gun shows to continue.

"I may be wrong but not uncertain." Said my my father on almost everything.

E Pluribus Unum
04-20-2009, 9:29 PM
Its not that different from most other gun shows that make you zip tie your bolt open.

When I go to the Cashman center in Las Vegas, they make you render the firearm "safe" by placing a zip tie through the mag well and out the breach of any firearm brought inside. This would render the firearm safe for handling and would pass scrutiny (I believe).

Jpach
04-20-2009, 11:49 PM
Howabout instead of locking firearms, require firearms and ammo to be in separate containers. Its not that hard to unlock a firearm lock. No harder than it is to open a can of ammo, load a mag, load the gun and blast away at innocents. However having the guns locked does sound more "feel-goodish"