PDA

View Full Version : Please attend Nordyke oral arguments and post-court Lunch 9/24 10:00am


Pages : [1] 2

artherd
09-11-2009, 12:43 AM
Nordyke is being heard En Banc by the 9th at 10:00am. Please attend in your sunday best!

UPDATE:

The Courthouse:
Courtroom One
James R. Browning Courthouse
95 Seventh Street, San Francisco, CA

The Lunch:
Details are later in this thread (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showpost.php?p=3071664&postcount=56)
Or Buy Tickets Now! (http://www.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/events/74-nordykelunch)


Afterword, we're hosting a celebratory lunch - the purpose of this thread is to swag headcount so here are some parameters!

Cost: ~$40
Time: ~noonish or after
Location: walking distance to the courthouse in downtown SF.
Format: long lunch, q&a panel with CGF execs and the best damn RKBA lawyers in the world.

ARE YOU IN?! Vote in the poll!


PS: More on the event itself soon. We're going to PACK and I mean PACK the courtrooms like we did last time. Show up in suits (no exceptions).

peepshowal
09-11-2009, 12:59 AM
I'm in.

jdberger
09-11-2009, 8:01 AM
I'm in :)

Python2
09-11-2009, 8:37 AM
Sigh, I would not have missed it but am out of the country that week.

FS00008
09-11-2009, 8:45 AM
I'm in.

Blackhawk556
09-11-2009, 9:32 AM
I probably will be ble to make this one, no school or work on 24th :)

Theseus
09-11-2009, 11:27 AM
Nordyke is being heard En Banc by the 9th at 10:00am.

Afterword, we're hosting a celebratory lunch - the purpose of this thread is to swag headcount so here are some parameters!

Cost: ~$40
Time: ~noonish or after
Location: walking distance to the courthouse in downtown SF.
Format: long lunch, q&a panel with CGF execs and the best damn RKBA lawyers in the world.

ARE YOU IN?! Vote in the poll!


PS: More on the event itself soon. We're going to PACK and I mean PACK the courtrooms like we did last time. Show up in suits (no exceptions).

Funds are tight, but if I can get someone that is interested in carpooling with me up there I can afford it. . .I think. . .

bwiese
09-11-2009, 11:30 AM
Dry-cleaning & pressing my unitard as I write...

wildhawker
09-11-2009, 11:31 AM
Dry-cleaning & pressing my unitard as I write...

The sequined one?

In.

FS00008
09-11-2009, 12:37 PM
Who wants to carpool from EastBay? I live in San Ramon (right on the Danville border) and would like to save some dough on parking and such by carpooling. I could drive if people threw in for gas and parking. I have a large car (Ford Crown Victoria).

jdberger
09-11-2009, 12:41 PM
BART takes you almost there.

hoffmang
09-11-2009, 1:00 PM
Locally, I suggest BART.

Theseus - contact FreshTapCoke or Stumpy as both or either may be coming up from your neck of the woods.

-Gene

sorensen440
09-11-2009, 1:01 PM
I'm going to try to be there but my work situation is sketchy right now

madmike
09-11-2009, 1:39 PM
I'm too fat for my suite and too broke to take the day off these days, but I'll be there in spirit. Plus, I'll try to talk as many people as I can into going.

-madmike.

rkt88edmo
09-11-2009, 1:51 PM
Afterword!

unusedusername
09-11-2009, 2:43 PM
I say that 90% chance that I'm in...

rips31
09-11-2009, 4:27 PM
right around the corner from my office. def be there.

command_liner
09-11-2009, 4:56 PM
I am in unless something goes way awry.

Glock22Fan
09-11-2009, 5:03 PM
Sorry, I'll be shooting deer (I hope) in Utah and exercising my Utah right to carry a concealed weapon. Probably my full-sized 1911.

Hope we get everything we want from this.

thedrickel
09-11-2009, 5:33 PM
I'm there.

FS00008
09-11-2009, 5:37 PM
I really don't care to take Bart in my good clothes...

wildhawker
09-11-2009, 5:39 PM
I really don't care to take Bart in my good clothes...

It's quite a bit easier than trying to park in SF; a good number of East Bay CGNers took BART last go-'round.

jdberger
09-11-2009, 6:41 PM
I really don't care to take Bart in my good clothes...

Get over it.;)

Thousands do every day. Just make sure you don't sit in gum.

It's also a heckava lot cheaper than paying to cross the bridge and parking.

FS00008
09-11-2009, 7:22 PM
Hmm, well maybe a CGN'er bart car...

:-P

Stubby
09-11-2009, 9:50 PM
I will be there +1

Purple K
09-11-2009, 9:52 PM
I'm going!!! If anyone wants to carpool from Benicia, I'll drive.

Purple K
09-11-2009, 10:11 PM
for mapquest;
9th Court
95 Seventh Street
San Francisco
94103

SwissFluCase
09-12-2009, 12:02 AM
I really don't care to take Bart in my good clothes...

It's MUNI you need to worry about. Don't sit in fresh pile...

See you all at the courthouse, and this time I'll make lunch.


Regards,


SwissFluCase

KylaGWolf
09-12-2009, 10:51 PM
I wish I could be there. But will just have come back from Front Sight and well also now having to make a trip to my dads in Ohio a week later. :( Unfortunately that one is not a trip for fun (his health is not good). So I will just have to be there in spirit.

BigDogatPlay
09-13-2009, 1:52 PM
I intend to try and make the hearing, but likely can't stick around for lunch.

doughboy334
09-13-2009, 7:51 PM
I'll try and make it folks.

gotshotgun?
09-13-2009, 8:41 PM
Damn! I go to golden gate law a few blocks away, I'll try and get a few class friends to go with me

hoffmang
09-13-2009, 9:51 PM
Damn! I go to golden gate law a few blocks away, I'll try and get a few class friends to go with me

Not often you get to see circuit precedent created.

-Gene

Stormfeather
09-13-2009, 10:01 PM
I will be there pressed and dressed.

nicki
09-13-2009, 10:48 PM
My plane to St Louis leaves 12noon from San Jose, so I can't join you guys.

Taking a camera person with me so that we can videotape the SAF GRPC in St Louis.

Looking forward to you telling the other leaders in the gun movement nationwide what happened and getting it on video to share with everyone else.

Does anyone know if C Span got another waiver from the 9th to tape this hearing?

Nicki

greasemonkey
09-14-2009, 12:16 AM
Show up in suits (no exceptions).


Technically it IS a suit...

http://ak.buy.com/db_assets/prod_lrg_images/593/211934593.jpg

I plan to be there, anyone from Fresno/Bako interested? Don't worry, I'll wear an actual formal suit, I don't even own the pink gorilla suit yet.


.

Davidwhitewolf
09-14-2009, 9:59 AM
I'll be there.

yellowfin
09-14-2009, 10:22 AM
If I were in a position to where I could afford a plane ticket to go to a court case and lunch, I'd probably be in a position to fund a similar court case here in NY myself. Sadly I'm not one of those people yet. :(

jdberger
09-14-2009, 3:57 PM
And we've settled on a restaurant....stay tuned for details! It should be yummy!

derek@thepackingrat.net
09-14-2009, 8:53 PM
I will be there.

FreedomIsNotFree
09-14-2009, 10:57 PM
I will be there for the hearing. Unfortunately work obligations have me after noon and I won't be able to make the lunch.

trilogy
09-14-2009, 10:59 PM
hmmm....is the first day of classes really that important?

bwiese
09-14-2009, 11:08 PM
And we've settled on a restaurant....stay tuned for details! It should be yummy!

House of Prime Rib?
Harris' Steakhouse?
Ruth's Chris?

hoffmang
09-14-2009, 11:30 PM
House of Prime Rib?
Harris' Steakhouse?
Ruth's Chris?

Lunch place closer to the Court.

-Gene

artherd
09-14-2009, 11:58 PM
hmmm....is the first day of classes really that important?

This may be the best class you ever attend.

oaklander
09-15-2009, 8:10 AM
I'm in.

:)

FS00008
09-15-2009, 8:50 AM
I can't wait!

rkt88edmo
09-15-2009, 8:52 AM
Lunch place closer to the Court.

-Gene

What, we're not renting out the gift center and having a full blown disco gala?

redneckshootist
09-15-2009, 9:16 AM
ok Im in, Im sure the boss will give me the time off, but I dont wanna wear a suit........... I will though.
oh and JDBerger can we talk about ak pistols as we sit next to LCAV people again:D

jdberger
09-15-2009, 9:35 AM
House of Prime Rib?
Harris' Steakhouse?
Ruth's Chris?

Bill, for you I did look into House of Prime Rib.

Unfortunately, they aren't open for lunch and despite my assurances that YOU would be there in your finest unitard, they wouldn't budge.

itsmrjames
09-15-2009, 1:48 PM
hopefully i can make this.

leitung
09-15-2009, 1:56 PM
Damm all the good stuff is going down in the bay area..

It's too far on too short of notice for me, I can't get the time off to do it now as cover is too hard to find.

I put myself down as a maybe as of right now, I am gonna see what I can do to make it, this is very important.

6172crew
09-15-2009, 9:46 PM
Damm all the good stuff is going down in the bay area..

It's too far on too short of notice for me, I can't get the time off to do it now as cover is too hard to find.

I put myself down as a maybe as of right now, I am gonna see what I can do to make it, this is very important.

Yep, me and the room mate are working on a plan to make it. This one will be on the news for sure.

jdberger
09-15-2009, 10:05 PM
as an added bonus, we'll be able to listen to Alex Kozinski's Q&A. That right there is worth the cost of admission!

pullnshoot25
09-16-2009, 12:56 PM
I just bought my ticket. I will be there.

CARRY ON!

-N8

jdberger
09-16-2009, 2:58 PM
Below are the details for the Post Nordyke Lunch. (https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=221197) I hope that you can all attend.

Location: Soluna Cafe and Lounge (http://www.solunasf.com/)
272 McAllister Street (at Larkin & Civic Center Plaza)
San Francisco, CA 94102

Time: Shortly after the hearing concludes.

Payment Information $45 per person.

Pay at the door or through Paypal. (http://www.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/events/74-nordykelunch)



Menu:

TRAY-PASSED APPETIZERS

Tequila Prawns with avocado, cilantro on fresh tortilla chips
Mushroom Risotto Cakes with roasted pepper, arugula pesto, truffle oil

ENTREE COURSE (choose one)

Cobb Salad
Romaine, Chicken, Bacon, Cherry Tomato, Avocado, Eggs, Pt. Reyes Blue
Cheese, Creamy Tarragon Dressing

Spinach Salad
Panko Crusted Goat Cheese, Frisee', Oranges, Beets, Sweet &
Spicy Mustard Vinaigrette

Grilled Chicken Sandwich
Smoked Mozzarella, Roasted Bell Pepper, Pesto

Steak Sandwich
Thinly-sliced NY Strip Steak, Asiago, Rosemary-Horseradish Cream, Au Jus

Pumpkin Ravioli
Brown Butter, Spinach, Sage, Spiced Pumpkin Seeds,
Maple-Ancho Chile Syrup, Parmigiano Reggiano

DESSERT

White Chocolate Bread Pudding
Toasted Almonds, Candied Walnuts, Caramel Sauce, Cinnamon Gelato

sholling
09-16-2009, 3:11 PM
I'd love to go but I'm out of work and can't swing a trip to frisco right now. Plus I'm keeping my suit pressed and ready for interviews.

jdberger
09-16-2009, 3:12 PM
Lunch menu posted. (https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=222873)

1JimMarch
09-16-2009, 3:23 PM
"Dessert" would be the 2nd Amendment incorporated :).

7x57
09-16-2009, 3:48 PM
"Dessert" would be the 2nd Amendment incorporated :).

No, no, that's "desserts," an even sweeter dish. :D

7x57

1859sharps
09-16-2009, 4:23 PM
I take it that because a victory lunch is being planned, odds are good that incorporation will not be over turned?

E Pluribus Unum
09-16-2009, 4:26 PM
"Dessert" would be the 2nd Amendment incorporated :).

AGAIN. :)

pullnshoot25
09-16-2009, 4:53 PM
This sounds good. It is going to be fun meeting all you Calgunners!

hoffmang
09-16-2009, 5:15 PM
I take it that because a victory lunch is being planned, odds are good that incorporation will not be over turned?

Oral argument will give us a feel for what the outcomes might be. However, no opinion will be released the day of argument.

-Gene

FS00008
09-16-2009, 8:40 PM
Can't wait! Do we pay the day of or pre-pay?

jdberger
09-16-2009, 8:54 PM
Oral argument will give us a feel for what the outcomes might be. However, no opinion will be released the day of argument.

-Gene

That's not necessarily true, Gene.

I have it from inside sources that Kozinski is going to give a scathing speech, re-invoking his dissent in Silveria and demonstrating the Sumo/rattlesnake metaphor. At the end, he'll decide for the Nordykes, call for a voice vote to confirm, get it 8-3 (little bird told me this) and finish with an elaborate "high-five" sequence with Gould and O'Scannlain. As a warning to Statists everywhere, he'll order full attorneys fees for the Nordykes and their counsel and tack on treble damages. Interest will be set at 5%.

At least, that's what I'm hoping for....:D

madhatter
09-16-2009, 9:12 PM
Is thare a bar?

jdberger
09-16-2009, 9:35 PM
Is thare a bar?

Are you kidding?

You betcha!

7x57
09-16-2009, 9:41 PM
I have it from inside sources that Kozinski is going to give a scathing speech....

I'm not sure that the voices inside your head are "inside sources." :rolleyes:

7x57

Blackhawk556
09-17-2009, 1:43 AM
I'm not sure that the voices inside your head are "inside sources." :rolleyes:

7x57

thats what i was thinking

7x57
09-18-2009, 3:49 PM
Funds are tight, but if I can get someone that is interested in carpooling with me up there I can afford it. . .I think. . .

Theseus doesn't expect to make it, unfortunately. Anyone else interested in a carpool from SoCal?

7x57

notnowjohn
09-18-2009, 4:00 PM
I'm in.

1911_sfca
09-18-2009, 5:21 PM
I voted "maybe", but I'm 90% in..

ivanimal
09-18-2009, 5:31 PM
I am planning on being there.

jdberger
09-21-2009, 11:57 AM
and I'm gonna bump this up to the top again with a link to the CGF website where you can conveniently prepay for the dinner.

Click Here (http://www.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/events/74-nordykelunch)

jdberger
09-21-2009, 12:05 PM
bumpity with additional information re cost and options for prepayment.

jdberger
09-21-2009, 12:12 PM
After oral arguments before the en banc Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in Nordyke v King (http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/Nordyke_v._King), The Calguns Foundation is hosting a lunch event at Soluna Cafe and Lounge

The bar opens shortly after the argument has ended. Soluna is a short 3 block walk from the courthouse. (http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/) Tickets are only $45 per person and will be available at the door but we would request that you purchase them online below. The menu is pre-fixe and available here. If you're a student or the price is otherwise prohibitive, don't despair. Calgunners are a sharing bunch and we expect certain folks will be picking up the tab for those in need. Don't hesitate to ask.


Below are the details for the Post Nordyke Lunch. (https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=221197) I hope that you can all attend.

Location: Soluna Cafe and Lounge (http://www.solunasf.com/)
272 McAllister Street (at Larkin & Civic Center Plaza)
San Francisco, CA 94102

Time: Shortly after the hearing concludes.

Tickets Tickets are only $45 and available at the door, but we'd prefer that you purchase them online here (http://www.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/events/74-nordykelunch).

Menu:

TRAY-PASSED APPETIZERS

Tequila Prawns with avocado, cilantro on fresh tortilla chips
Mushroom Risotto Cakes with roasted pepper, arugula pesto, truffle oil

ENTREE COURSE (choose one)

Cobb Salad
Romaine, Chicken, Bacon, Cherry Tomato, Avocado, Eggs, Pt. Reyes Blue
Cheese, Creamy Tarragon Dressing

Spinach Salad
Panko Crusted Goat Cheese, Frisee', Oranges, Beets, Sweet &
Spicy Mustard Vinaigrette

Grilled Chicken Sandwich
Smoked Mozzarella, Roasted Bell Pepper, Pesto

Steak Sandwich
Thinly-sliced NY Strip Steak, Asiago, Rosemary-Horseradish Cream, Au Jus

Pumpkin Ravioli
Brown Butter, Spinach, Sage, Spiced Pumpkin Seeds,
Maple-Ancho Chile Syrup, Parmigiano Reggiano

DESSERT

White Chocolate Bread Pudding
Toasted Almonds, Candied Walnuts, Caramel Sauce, Cinnamon Gelato

artherd
09-21-2009, 2:08 PM
IN!

trashman
09-21-2009, 6:22 PM
In....

Whiskey84
09-21-2009, 7:13 PM
I'm not sure that the voices inside your head are "inside sources." :rolleyes:

7x57

I'm pretty sure that's as "inside" as a source can get... LOL ;)

Purple K
09-21-2009, 9:16 PM
Sneaking out of work early for a "Dr's appointment" :devil:

Purple K
09-21-2009, 9:24 PM
That's not necessarily true, Gene.

I have it from inside sources that Kozinski is going to give a scathing speech, re-invoking his dissent in Silveria and demonstrating the Sumo/rattlesnake metaphor. At the end, he'll decide for the Nordykes, call for a voice vote to confirm, get it 8-3 (little bird told me this) and finish with an elaborate "high-five" sequence with Gould and O'Scannlain. As a warning to Statists everywhere, he'll order full attorneys fees for the Nordykes and their counsel and tack on treble damages. Interest will be set at 5%.

At least, that's what I'm hoping for....:D

Truth is often stranger than fiction.

hollabillz
09-21-2009, 11:24 PM
WE OPEN CARRYING?! :D :(

Electricboy
09-21-2009, 11:25 PM
So jeans and a button shirt wont fly? I'm an electrician and havent worn a suit in ten years and ten inches ago. I'll be there if i get the go ahead, otherwise no.

hoffmang
09-22-2009, 12:45 AM
So jeans and a button shirt wont fly? I'm an electrician and havent worn a suit in ten years and ten inches ago. I'll be there if i get the go ahead, otherwise no.

At bare minimum, coat, collar, and slacks. We'd prefer coat and tie. The guys you hear the most from here will be as dressed as they can pull off - aka suit.

You don't fight for the republic every day...

-Gene

artherd
09-22-2009, 1:19 AM
So jeans and a button shirt wont fly? I'm an electrician and havent worn a suit in ten years and ten inches ago. I'll be there if i get the go ahead, otherwise no.

Go get fitted. This is going to be worth it - you will literally watch history being made.

Digital_Boy
09-22-2009, 8:56 AM
Would love to, but I'm in San Diego.

SixPointEight
09-22-2009, 8:58 AM
I wish I could come out and support this, but I don't have the time or money. So I'll send with you guys my good wishes.

With that said...how far do you think a decision in our favor would go in this state? So far as to change our assault weapons laws? Eliminating AW lists etc?

Mug
09-22-2009, 9:31 AM
At bare minimum, coat, collar, and slacks. We'd prefer coat and tie. The guys you hear the most from here will be as dressed as they can pull off - aka suit.

You don't fight for the republic every day...

-Gene

I think this event is too important to miss because of some arbitrary dress code.

If you have a monkey suit that fits or the scratch to get one, by all means suit up.

Five years ago I would have donated a few custom suits to my fellow CA shooters in need, but not today.

It could end up costing AT LEAST $350-500 dollars to suit up, buy lunch, parking, gas, drinks, tips, etc. In these economic times, I think that we can allow a REAL "Joe the Plumber" to come dressed in the best he can afford to see history.

rkt88edmo
09-22-2009, 9:57 AM
Any guesstimate on what time we should be trying to arrive for best seating?

Post your jacket size, see if anyone else can help you find a coat, or hit up goodwill and pick up a sportcoat? As Mug pointed out, I would think that we should all do our best, but I would want to attend even if I didn't have a suit.

jdberger
09-22-2009, 10:10 AM
I think this event is too important to miss because of some arbitrary dress code.

If you have a monkey suit that fits or the scratch to get one, by all means suit up.

Five years ago I would have donated a few custom suits to my fellow CA shooters in need, but not today.

It could end up costing AT LEAST $350-500 dollars to suit up, buy lunch, parking, gas, drinks, tips, etc. In these economic times, I think that we can allow a REAL "Joe the Plumber" to come dressed in the best he can afford to see history.

I have jackets, shirts and ties that I can donate. Some slacks, too.

Post your needs.

At the last event, every Calgunner was wearing a Jacket at the minimum. The only attendee who wasn't was some broad from the Brady Campaign who showed up in a t-shirt.

wildhawker
09-22-2009, 10:11 AM
Mug,

It is critical that we present ourselves in the most professional manner possible, including appearance. Joe the plumber wan't watching an en banc circuit hear a landmark case in the main courtroom.

For $75 you can get an overnight tux rental.

I think this event is too important to miss because of some arbitrary dress code.

If you have a monkey suit that fits or the scratch to get one, by all means suit up.

Five years ago I would have donated a few custom suits to my fellow CA shooters in need, but not today.

It could end up costing AT LEAST $350-500 dollars to suit up, buy lunch, parking, gas, drinks, tips, etc. In these economic times, I think that we can allow a REAL "Joe the Plumber" to come dressed in the best he can afford to see history.

Kid Stanislaus
09-22-2009, 10:12 AM
I'm look'n for car poolers from Stanislaus or San Joaquin counties, I live in Oakdale. I just paid for my ticket so I guess that means I'm going. I drive a new Toyota Corolla (just HAD to brag a little!) and I could take three people with me. PM me if you're interested.

pullnshoot25
09-22-2009, 10:20 AM
Macy's is having a sale right now. My dad got a full-on Ralph Lauren suit for 150 bucks. I got a sportcoat for 45. Go there and do it!

jdberger
09-22-2009, 10:21 AM
Would love to, but I'm in San Diego.

People are carpooling

Lancear15
09-22-2009, 10:29 AM
I'm look'n for car poolers from Stanislaus or San Joaquin counties, I live in Oakdale. I just paid for my ticket so I guess that means I'm going. I drive a new Toyota Corolla (just HAD to brag a little!) and I could take three people with me. PM me if you're interested.

If I wasn't a corporate slave I would definitely join you :mad:

Electricboy
09-22-2009, 10:45 AM
Ok, i'll beg, barrow, or steal a suit. The pay feature didn't work so i'll have to pay at the door.

steak sandwich

jdberger
09-22-2009, 10:48 AM
Ok, i'll beg, barrow, or steal a suit. The pay feature didn't work so i'll have to pay at the door.

steak sandwich

You might want to try again. It worked for me just moments ago.

Otherwise, payment at the door is fine.

Just note that I only accept Liberty Dollars....:eek:

7x57
09-22-2009, 11:33 AM
People are carpooling

Not from the Pasadena area, it seems. :(

I'm really trying to work this out again. Anyone willing to donate floorspace to crash on Wed. night? I don't think I want to leave at 3AM.

7x57

jdberger
09-22-2009, 11:37 AM
Not from the Pasadena area, it seems. :(

I'm really trying to work this out again. Anyone willing to donate floorspace to crash on Wed. night? I don't think I want to leave at 3AM.

7x57

Sure. I've an extra room. It even has a bed.

(I also have a big loud family - so be warned)

wildhawker
09-22-2009, 11:38 AM
7, We have humble accommodations but you're welcome to stay with us.

7x57
09-22-2009, 11:45 AM
Sure. I've an extra room. It even has a bed.

(I also have a big loud family - so be warned)

Oh, that's no problem. I'd like to bring my loud five-year-old, so someday I could tell him that he witnessed his birthright being defended, but there's no way he could be quiet for that long. I'd have to leave within ten minutes.

Then there is the agony of having him in the car seat that long...twice.

7x57

7x57
09-22-2009, 11:47 AM
7, We have humble accommodations but you're welcome to stay with us.

I believe I can manage to dress myself without a manservant. The button things go in the little holes, right? :D

7x57

oaklander
09-22-2009, 1:00 PM
I have extra room in my house in East Oakland too if anyone needs a couch to sleep on. . .

EDIT: ticket purchased!

Harley Quinn
09-22-2009, 1:13 PM
It is critical that we present ourselves in the most professional manner possible, including appearance. For $75 you can get an overnight tux rental.
:confused:
Silly to dress up like this IMHO... Just not something that will sway them one way or another, more people are fighting for the homeless than worring about this case.

I for one will be there, but I doubt it will make a difference... Tickets on sale and lunch etc. is nice...But not needed either to be there...

It is an important case for sure. Lets hope it goes our way. Do you think Chris and his dress code was the reason for his attention in AZ :eek:

The best thing is, many well mannered folks show up, dressed as most well mannered folks do, and demonstrate, will be the answer, peaceful please.

If you don't show up in a suit and tie don't expect to get in :o

Regards

jdberger
09-22-2009, 1:15 PM
This isn't "Judge Judy".

When you go to Court, you wear a suit (or at the very least a jacket and tie).

Why is this so hard to understand?

Harley Quinn
09-22-2009, 1:18 PM
This isn't "Judge Judy".

When you go to Court, you wear a suit (or at the very least a jacket and tie).

Why is this so hard to understand?

Been the way as long as I can remember. But a tux:sleeping:

Regards

Electricboy
09-22-2009, 1:29 PM
I have been to court for custody 50+ times in 14 years and usually get what i want in t-shirt and jeans, or button up rangler dress shirt.

But i found a suit.

Been a long time since i've been is SF that time of day. any sugestions on parking? i'm driving from ukiah. or should i just go to colma bart?

Harley Quinn
09-22-2009, 1:40 PM
I have been to court for custody 50+ times in 14 years and usually get what i want in t-shirt and jeans, or button up rangler dress shirt.

But i found a suit.

Been a long time since i've been is SF that time of day. any sugestions on parking? i'm driving from ukiah. or should i just go to colma bart?

So many are saying it is the dress code that makes the day...Hmm

How about bare arms and women not covered correct. Showing all the tatts they have now, put on them for fashion:confused:

Lets not allow any in like that either:p

Electricboy
09-22-2009, 1:59 PM
I know they don't like shorts and tank-tops. I watched my ex get removed and have to wait in the hall until our turn.:D

Harley Quinn
09-22-2009, 2:35 PM
That is a good idea to go to a bart station...I am going to do that myself:D

I'll have to check the site, and determine the best location.

Dress codes are not harsh, but there is such a thing, as going to far...Courts are funny that way. :43:

Tyrone
09-22-2009, 2:36 PM
confirmed w tics and suit.

Netlemming
09-22-2009, 4:48 PM
You don't have to be dressed to the hilt. But do be presentable as you are showing respect to the court, the judges, and the country.

Netlemming
09-22-2009, 4:53 PM
If you're unable to attend, the argument is posted by noon the following day on the court's website. It's www.ca9.uscourts.gov
The case is No. 07-15763, Nordyke v. King

Mug
09-22-2009, 5:01 PM
Does anybody know the seating capacity of the courtroom and how early we should arrive to make sure we get in?

jdberger
09-22-2009, 5:07 PM
Does anybody know the seating capacity of the courtroom and how early we should arrive to make sure we get in?

You'll get in. Last time we filled 2 courtrooms and the lunchroom.

You have to be lucky to get into the main room.

hoffmang
09-22-2009, 8:21 PM
We were in the 150 visitor range the last time. I expect we'll approach 250 this time. The court has been warned.

-Gene

Purple K
09-22-2009, 10:43 PM
Anyone want to carpool from Benicia? I'll drive.

tonelar
09-23-2009, 1:09 AM
If anyone wants to park in SF and get on Muni to make the courthouse, let me know... My job has some parking available.

Tony
415-794-0505

unusedusername
09-23-2009, 8:34 AM
Okay, I've bought 2 lunch tickets as my Wife wants to come with as well :flowers: I had to do some digging in the closet but I've secured suits.

Put us down for 2x Grilled Chicken Sandwich

I have been to court for custody 50+ times in 14 years and usually get what i want in t-shirt and jeans, or button up rangler dress shirt.

But i found a suit.

Been a long time since i've been is SF that time of day. any sugestions on parking? i'm driving from ukiah. or should i just go to colma bart?

I would recommend the bart... parking in downtown SF is unpredictable at best.

KylaGWolf
09-23-2009, 9:19 AM
I just bought my ticket. I will be there.

CARRY ON!

-N8

I want a full report of what happens!

rkt88edmo
09-23-2009, 9:21 AM
http://sfgov.org/site/frame.asp?u=http://www.sfmta.com/

I don't use this garage regularly, but I am guessing parking won't be an issue there. If I can't get in I'll park a little farther away where I know there is parking and hop in a cab.

Harley Quinn
09-23-2009, 9:47 AM
We were in the 150 visitor range the last time. I expect we'll approach 250 this time. The court has been warned.

-Gene

Hmm, warning the court, already starting off on the wrong foot:eek:

:43:

Kid Stanislaus
09-23-2009, 11:02 AM
I'm still look'n for anybody who needs a ride. I live in Oakdale and I'm planning on leaving at 7:00 so I can be sure of finding a parking lot and then arriving at the court house in time for the presentations.

Socrates
09-23-2009, 2:49 PM
Hi
I'm sort of new here.
Does anyone have BART instructions?
I'm coming from Walnut Creek.

Is the 9th circuit security the same as the California Supreme Court?

Would like to attend the lunch, but, finances are not good right now.

email with information at:

santill28@gmail.com

Thanks

Gregory Santilli

jdberger
09-23-2009, 2:59 PM
This might help.

Bart Schedule for leaving Walnut Creek and arriving at Civic Center at 9:00 am. (http://www.bart.gov/schedules/quickplanner.aspx?orig=WCRK&addr1=&dest=CIVC&addr2=&type=arrival&date=09%2F24%2F2009&time=9%3A00+AM)

The Ninth Circuit is a Federal Building. The guys running you through the magnometer are US Marshals. You won't be required to leave a urine sample, but yes, security will be tight.

Please be gracious toward the Marshals. We're putting more people through security in one hour than they usually see all week.

hoffmang
09-23-2009, 4:13 PM
Remember:

Wear a tie.
Don't bring a weapon or knife.
You must have valid government issued photo ID to get in.

-Gene

trashman
09-23-2009, 5:14 PM
Looking forward to the hearing tomorrow, but also to seeing the usual suspects and putting some more faces to names.

--Neill

KylaGWolf
09-23-2009, 5:32 PM
Gene make sure pictures are taken at lunch so those of us that can't be there can see you all having fun!

marshaul
09-23-2009, 5:46 PM
Remember:

Wear a tie.
Don't bring a weapon or knife.
You must have valid government issued photo ID to get in.

-Gene

I just bought a tie to go with that off-white suit I mentioned on Sunday (no, I don't ordinarily wear this particular suit with a tie :P).

So, I'll be there.

Unfortunately I'm afraid $45 is too steep after the extravagance of buying Calguns shirts and parking on Sunday, so unless folks are still planning to cover some poor students, I'm going to have to miss the dinner. :o

doughboy334
09-23-2009, 6:01 PM
Won't be able to make it bc of work, but good luck squeezing everyone into Saluna lounge that place is pretty tight!!!

oaklander
09-23-2009, 7:02 PM
I am going to bed early tonight so I can get up bright and early for this!

:D

Purple K
09-23-2009, 10:00 PM
The Civic Center BART Station is within walking distance.

Liberty1
09-23-2009, 10:15 PM
GIVE US YOUR TIRED, YOUR POOR, YOUR HUNGRY CALGUNNERS YEARNING FOR BEER OR WINE AND BEEF, CHICKEN OR STEAK (WITH VEGETABLES) AND GREAT COMRADESHIP!!!!

The Calguns Foundation is hosting a lunch event at Soluna Cafe and Lounge

If you're a student or the price is otherwise prohibitive, don't despair. Calgunners are a sharing bunch and we expect certain folks will be picking up the tab for those in need. Don't hesitate to ask.


Below are the details for the Post Nordyke Lunch. (https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=221197) I hope that you can all attend.

Location: Soluna Cafe and Lounge (http://www.solunasf.com/)
272 McAllister Street (at Larkin & Civic Center Plaza)
San Francisco, CA 94102

Time: Shortly after the hearing concludes.

Tickets Tickets are only $45 and available at the door, but we'd prefer that you purchase them online here (http://www.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/events/74-nordykelunch).

Menu:

Stormfeather
09-23-2009, 10:24 PM
wow. . . this sucks... this old suit doesnt fit, it must be 10 years old! hahaha! no worries, I will find something!
Purchasing tickets now!

jdberger
09-23-2009, 10:52 PM
Won't be able to make it bc of work, but good luck squeezing everyone into Saluna lounge that place is pretty tight!!!

Have faith.

It'll work.

Come after for post lunch cocktails.

Purple K
09-24-2009, 8:25 AM
Just getting on BART. Looking forward to court. Will probably miss lunch to get back to work.

marshaul
09-24-2009, 8:47 AM
Well, I can't make it.

Somehow, I have eczema on my hands, which causes them to do stupid things like bleed all over my white suit pants for no particular reason other than a slightly stuck zipper.

I don't have anything else to wear, somehow my nice clothes are all in Virginia except this one suit.

Have fun guys.

donstarr
09-24-2009, 9:17 AM
I also cannot make it. Some unexpected family and work obligations must take priority.

There's a "lunch ticket" in my name if anyone wants needs it.

EDIT: As described on the CGF page (http://www.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/events/74-nordykelunch), I'll donate my lunch ticket to someone in need... maybe someone who's spending a small fortune on fuel to make the trip.

trashman
09-24-2009, 9:39 AM
got here at nine-thirty sharp and the courtroom is *already packed!* great work calgunners!

Experimentalist
09-24-2009, 9:43 AM
We're here in the court room, waiting.

Oaklander, Gene, Ivan, and RedNeckShootist are here, probably others I don't recognize.

There's a casual air in the room right now, with a fairly tense undercurrent.

berto
09-24-2009, 9:44 AM
Upstairs in courtroom 3 with about 20 people.

Harley Quinn
09-24-2009, 10:04 AM
I was going to go but decided not to after reading many links that were given out...

Bottom line is the county is right IMHO...

The Gunshow is a private enterprise and needs to find a new location...

Sorry guys, can not in all honesty support the private sector over the county...

I am interested, but it is a no brainer IMHO...Sort of like religion and secular rights, of locations where it is not correct to push the Religious thoughts...

There has to be a freedom zone of sorts, and the courts will up hold it, I have a feeling.

I feel many are doing it for special rights folks, not a good deal. Permits are needed and can be given or not given...It is all about money not freedoms.

Regards

Paul E
09-24-2009, 10:34 AM
I was going to go but decided not to after reading many links that were given out...

Bottom line is the county is right IMHO...

The Gunshow is a private enterprise and needs to find a new location...

Sorry guys, can not in all honesty support the private sector over the county...

I am interested, but it is a no brainer IMHO...Sort of like religion and secular rights, of locations where it is not correct to push the Religious thoughts...

There has to be a freedom zone of sorts, and the courts will up hold it, I have a feeling.

I feel many are doing it for special rights folks, not a good deal. Permits are needed and can be given or not given...It is all about money not freedoms.

Regards

I think a lot of the stir and drama rises up from the incorporation undertones not necessarily the gun show itself (although thats important as well)

Purple K
09-24-2009, 10:34 AM
I hate judges that ask a question, then interrupt you while you're answering

eaglemike
09-24-2009, 11:19 AM
I was going to go but decided not to after reading many links that were given out...

Bottom line is the county is right IMHO...

The Gunshow is a private enterprise and needs to find a new location...

Sorry guys, can not in all honesty support the private sector over the county...

I am interested, but it is a no brainer IMHO...Sort of like religion and secular rights, of locations where it is not correct to push the Religious thoughts...

There has to be a freedom zone of sorts, and the courts will up hold it, I have a feeling.

I feel many are doing it for special rights folks, not a good deal. Permits are needed and can be given or not given...It is all about money not freedoms.

Regards
Who is "the county?" It is the people! The people are supposed to own things owned by "the government" (something about by the people, of the people, etc)........
I'm thinking you are mistaken.....

Harley Quinn
09-24-2009, 11:25 AM
Who is "the county?" It is the people! The people are supposed to own things owned by "the government" (something about by the people, of the people, etc)........
I'm thinking you are mistaken.....

You have a good point, if looking at it from the standpoint of all taxes generated, etc...Might be the way to win that arguement. That would mean better book keeping by others and making sure the money was paid out to the county/state before the end of the days of the show. All paperwork would need to be looked at etc...Not sure those selling at the GS will go for that one.

Regards

wksun88
09-24-2009, 2:01 PM
updates!!

Python2
09-24-2009, 2:15 PM
I m currently in hawaii but my head is in what is going on in the oral. Update pls!

berto
09-24-2009, 2:17 PM
The hearing went well. Most attendees are at the luncheon/presentation/celebration. Audio of the hearings is linked in this forum.

RRangel
09-24-2009, 4:09 PM
I was going to go but decided not to after reading many links that were given out...

Bottom line is the county is right IMHO...

The Gunshow is a private enterprise and needs to find a new location...

Sorry guys, can not in all honesty support the private sector over the county...

I am interested, but it is a no brainer IMHO...Sort of like religion and secular rights, of locations where it is not correct to push the Religious thoughts...

There has to be a freedom zone of sorts, and the courts will up hold it, I have a feeling.

I feel many are doing it for special rights folks, not a good deal. Permits are needed and can be given or not given...It is all about money not freedoms.

Regards

Your post reads like someone who doesn't know what's taking place. Incorporation is the issue, and we're likely to get eventually.

Stormfeather
09-24-2009, 5:02 PM
Your post reads like someone who doesn't know what's taking place. Incorporation is the issue, and we're likely to get eventually.

I second this.
Looked pretty good for us today IMHO.

yellowfin
09-24-2009, 5:10 PM
It makes one eager to know what their thoughts were on the briefs and motions.

oaklander
09-24-2009, 6:33 PM
Yup - we rocked!

I second this.
Looked pretty good for us today IMHO.

RomanDad
09-24-2009, 7:08 PM
Kabuki

Harley Quinn
09-24-2009, 8:22 PM
Your post reads like someone who doesn't know what's taking place. Incorporation is the issue, and we're likely to get eventually.

To be honest, I hope I am wrong, anything/anytime the firearms folks feel it is a win, makes me feel better...

We have really been messed with, for the last 20 years in CA...

But I will wait and discuss it tomorrow when the ruling is in, for life.
:confused:
Regards

Snake9
09-24-2009, 8:46 PM
Seeing all the well-dressed ladies and gents today at the 9th Circus Court of appeals today representin'....You made this leathery old Snake proud. Those that recognized me now know how much I actually look like my avatar....:D:coolgleamA::thumbsup:

Experimentalist
09-24-2009, 9:56 PM
I'm fairly sure I saw a Mr. Gary Gorski, rocking the court room in jeans and a T-shirt.

:rolleyes:

hoffmang
09-24-2009, 11:27 PM
I'm fairly sure I saw a Mr. Gary Gorski, rocking the court room in jeans and a T-shirt.

:rolleyes:

Why would it surprise that Mr. Gorski would show no respect to a majority of the justices of the 9th Circuit... That was him in a yellow T-Shirt...

-Gene

artherd
09-25-2009, 12:46 AM
Why would it surprise that Mr. Gorski would show no respect to a majority of the justices of the 9th Circuit... That was him in a yellow T-Shirt...

-Gene

sigh...

7x57
09-25-2009, 12:58 AM
Why would it surprise that Mr. Gorski would show no respect to a majority of the justices of the 9th Circuit... That was him in a yellow T-Shirt...


OK, who forgot to give him an invite for the lunch party and panel?:D

7x57

KylaGWolf
09-25-2009, 1:45 PM
OK why does that not surprise me that he would show up to court like that. Then he wonders WHY the judges think hes an idiot.

pullnshoot25
09-25-2009, 1:47 PM
Why would it surprise that Mr. Gorski would show no respect to a majority of the justices of the 9th Circuit... That was him in a yellow T-Shirt...

-Gene

NO WAY! WHAT A GOON!

Harley Quinn
09-25-2009, 7:09 PM
OK why does that not surprise me that he would show up to court like that. Then he wonders WHY the judges think hes an idiot.

I am not sure he thinks that, nor does he care what you or they think about his clothing:43:

yellowfin
09-25-2009, 7:53 PM
<Tinfoil hat> Maybe his dress code and therefore lack of respect for the court in combination with previous appearances weighed in some part on their decision to stifle cases for the moment being so that they wouldn't have to see him again anytime in the near future? :TFH: </Tinfoil hat>

Electricboy
09-25-2009, 10:47 PM
snake9 it was nice talking to you in front of the courthouse

artherd
09-26-2009, 2:41 AM
I am not sure he thinks that, nor does he care what you or they think about his clothing:43:

You don't get to sleep with the daughter by calling the dad a ****wit.

Harley Quinn
09-26-2009, 9:37 AM
You don't get to sleep with the daughter by calling the dad a ****wit.

You'd be suprised at how wrong you are...

Being in LEO has opened up my eyes to what goes on, out in the real world.

The daughter of the stuffed shirt, might just like it:D

I have been at other locations reading about the case and it appears to me the main thing being pushed here is the lunch and get together...So I have to wonder what, really is the bottom line:eek:

Those who think this delay had anything to do with the apperance of folks at the hearing, need to read more about the case's pending with SCOTUS and the real reason for, waiting on those particular case's before Nordyke ruling comes down...

Sad to read a lot of the gibberish here to be honest...

Basic dog and pony show folks.

Regards

trashman
09-26-2009, 10:00 AM
I have been at other locations reading about the case and it appears to me the main thing being pushed here is the lunch and get together...So I have to wonder what, really is the bottom line:eek:


I am not following you here...seems like you are confusing sidebar commentary about Gorski's lack of respect / proper attire with Nordyke.

--Neill

Harley Quinn
09-26-2009, 11:52 AM
No I am not the one confused, it is others that think anything Gorski had to do with the delay of the case, are very :confused:

Been reading so many lame mentions, I am stopping for a while...Burned out on BS, is what I am...

Regards

7x57
09-26-2009, 12:02 PM
Y
I have been at other locations reading about the case and it appears to me the main thing being pushed here is the lunch and get together...So I have to wonder what, really is the bottom line:eek:


To be brutally honest, you have to wonder because you clearly don't know anything about CGF. You have all of 77 posts, which might or might not indicate the reason why.

Oddly enough, afterwards I suggested to Ben, I think, that CGF should make sure the wrap parties for such events are a not-to-be-missed thing, because some will come for that who wouldn't have come without. The bottom line is how many people show up. Beyond the fun of the lunch, the educational value of the panel discussion, and the opportunity to raise a bit more money for the CGF war chest, the wrap party events give people another reason to show up.

"But wait--you also get to eat with like-minded gunnies. And that's not all--we'll throw in, free, a panel discussion with some of the best 2A lawyers in the United States (which means the world). NOW how much effort would you expend to turn out and support the 2A."

7x57

Harley Quinn
09-26-2009, 1:03 PM
To be brutally honest, you have to wonder because you clearly don't know anything about CGF. You have all of 77 posts, which might or might not indicate the reason why.

Oddly enough, afterwards I suggested to Ben, I think, that CGF should make sure the wrap parties for such events are a not-to-be-missed thing, because some will come for that who wouldn't have come without. The bottom line is how many people show up. Beyond the fun of the lunch, the educational value of the panel discussion, and the opportunity to raise a bit more money for the CGF war chest, the wrap party events give people another reason to show up.

"But wait--you also get to eat with like-minded gunnies. And that's not all--we'll throw in, free, a panel discussion with some of the best 2A lawyers in the United States (which means the world). NOW how much effort would you expend to turn out and support the 2A."

7x57


I have been posting only of late true, but I have been around the block and other forums, a lot...

I should have gone, but feeling the way I did about some of the links and the end result of the day, was already pretty evident. The glad hand and bs was a bit much to be honest....Next time I will go, you can be sure of that.

Lawyers, been around them since the 60's, nothing new under the sun, really.

Regards

7x57
09-26-2009, 1:40 PM
I should have gone, but feeling the way I did about some of the links and the end result of the day, was already pretty evident. The glad hand and bs was a bit much to be honest....Next time I will go, you can be sure of that.


I don't know about the issues you're obliquely referring to, nor do I really care. But definitely go next time. Will it help? No one can say, because it's a question about the judges' subjective response to having a crowd at an appeals court hearing when normally nobody ever shows up to an appeals court hearing.

Before the first hearing Don said it might help, and that was enough for the people who went. We'll take what we can get.


Lawyers, been around them since the 60's, nothing new under the sun, really.


I can't really understand that attitude and don't want to. It will impair your ability to optimize your efforts to support the 2A fight, and that's enough.

ETA: and factually wrong. The Supreme Court finding that the 2A protects an individual right unconnected with military service, that self-defense is the core of the right, and that the appropriate level of scrutiny is higher than "rational basis" is something new under the sun. In fact, it reboots the process. We get one more chance to secure this right, and probably only one, as we litigate the consequences. But it's already helping--Alan Gura said that he's already seeing cases just go away that would not have before. We don't hear about them, but he does.

Having competent counsel representing gun rights is also something new under the sun. "Our" lawyers at least since 1873, and probably earlier, have been somewhere between incompetent and criminally negligent. We essentially cannot do worse than what was done in the late 19th and 20th centuries.

IOW: cheer up.

7x57

Harley Quinn
09-26-2009, 2:02 PM
I appreciate your candor, I have been a 2A advocate by way of supporting for a very long time.

Bottom line is, in this particular "Nordyke V King" issue, is, follow the money...

Either way it goes why is it important for the 2A folks, especially in CA where carrying is not allowed much at all.

CCW is not something easily obtained unless greasing a palm many mention, which is very bad to be honest. Other states are going blatantly in the opposite direction as CA. Migration, might be the answer.

I can't really understand that attitude and don't want to. It will impair your ability to optimize your efforts to support the 2A fight, and that's enough.

artherd
09-26-2009, 2:36 PM
m line is, in this particular "Nordyke V King" issue, is, follow the money...

Either way it goes why is it important for the 2A folks, especially in CA where carrying is not allowed much at all.

CCW is not something easily obtained unless greasing a palm many mention, which is very bad to be honest. Other states are going blatantly in the opposite direction as CA. Migration, might be the answer.

I'm sorry but ~HUNH~? Can you please form a rational argument and come back? Have you ever been told to do the same by a judge?

7x57
09-26-2009, 2:44 PM
Bottom line is, in this particular "Nordyke V King" issue, is, follow the money...


In this case, that is very much not the bottom line.


Either way it goes why is it important for the 2A folks, especially in CA where carrying is not allowed much at all.


Sigh. This has been answered at exhaustive length, though perhaps not for a while. It's a bit complex, but I guess I'm feeling sick enough that I might as well sit here and type.

Nordyke was originally important to the rest of us because it was a thinly-disguised attack on our ability to not only buy guns, but assemble together with like-minded people and celebrate our right to arms as free men. That's why it was originally a 1A freedom of expression and 14A equal protection case--that and the fact that ten years ago 2A claims were DOA in court. It was thought that other local governments would follow suit, and in fact Don said to the justices that this has in fact happened, and others have followed Alameda's lead and chased gun shows out.

I have taken my boy with me to gun shows, and one reason is so he can be in a place where gun ownership is normal and respected. That's important when you have children in California constantly bombarded by messages that he has no birthright of freedom at all. But you can't litigate abstract principles "naked" in common law, so the lawyers tell us--you must do so in the context of a real person harmed in a concrete way. So one way that "follow the money" fails you is that it suggests the "right" case would be one in which the issue was solely the 1A and 14A claims *on behalf of everybody*. That case, it seems, can't exist. But one litigating how the infringement of the Nordyke's rights can produce a result that we can all use in a similar situation.

On that basis, Don Kilmer took the case pro bono, and fought it for ten years. He doesn't get paid unless the actual gun show suit wins, BTW, and that was understood to be unlikely throughout most of that ten years. That's one way in which following the money makes you miss the motivations and significance. Another is that the Nordykes believe in the right as much as you do--I recall someone saying that they were in a courthouse waiting room and Sally Nordyke came in and dropped a copy of "America's First Freedom" with the other magazines. That's not someone who hopes to make some money because of the case.

The original case didn't have a 2A claim in it, and you can't bring up a new claim at appeal you didn't have in the original lawsuit, but the trial judge (if I can remember the complex history) brought it up on his own, which apparently allows Don to argue it at appeal after all.

Now, when Heller came down independently, we had a problem--it is more useful as a licence to litigate than for itself, and it takes a lot of time for cases to work their way through the system. That meant that the cases likely to use Heller first were ones already there--and most of those would amount to some perp's public defender tossing in an additional 2A claim that his dirtbag client had a 2A right to carry for self-defense while knocking over a liquor store. The problem with that is that in the process of tossing those claims out of court a lot of precedents get set that can render the 2A completely meaningless. It is entirely possible for an explicit Constitutional guarantee to be inoperative because of bad precedents. It has happened with state RKBA provisions, as Don Kates points out. There is also the problem of reasonable cases with very bad lawyers, which is an equally effective way to toss your rights into the trash can.

The most important point to be litigated post-Heller is whether the 2A is incorporated against the states, because it has no teeth unless it forbids the states to infringe on our rights. You can see, I hope, that a judge with some liquor store robbery case is unlikely to find that the 2A binds the state from infringing the rights of the drug addict making the claim. He is also unlikely to give it the full consideration if the lawyer before him is obnoxiously incompetent (I am straining to avoid naming some examples here). So we could lose the single most important issue of all simply by having precedent set in the context of bad litigation.

If only, you might think, we already had a case in the system that contained a 2A claim we could bring up at appeal after Heller. Well, that's where Nordyke came in. It was there, by pure luck. Except the timing wasn't quite right, because the appeals court had already ruled. Nothing we can do about that, but it turns out the panel can. They took the case back for reconsideration of their own initiative, and it's too bad we can't send them ice cream or something for that. The case was clean with no taint of "color," and even luckier Don Kilmer is a good attorney. And the result was that that court held that the 2A was incorporated, which opened the door for our lawsuits against the state over some of its most obnoxious infringments (forbidding carry for most and choosing their weapons for them). It also opened the door to freeing the other states, since what we really need is the US supreme court to rule in favor of incorporation. We need it to happen fast, while the Heller 5 are still there, and having the 9th incorporate increases our chances of getting them to take up the issue.

So the case is *important* for every single gun owner in the country. Since it was taken back for en banc review, we have to do it all over again. And it's just as important now as before, especially if it helps nudge SCOTUS to resolve the issue (in our favor).

Notice how nothing about the true significance of the case can be learned by "following the money." This was clear when someone asked Don Kilmer what he'd do if he got the worst result for him personally before, that the panel would send them back to the lower court for another round of unpaid litigation. I won't report to you his exact words here, but they were to the effect that if it saved the RKBA in the US it was worth losing the fees for ten years of work.

If you "follow the money," all you obtain is the picture of gun show promoters who are suing for the ability to make a profit on a gun show at the Alameda County fairgrounds, and a lawyer willing to bet a large sum in legal fees that he can win them that ability. And you miss *everything* about the case. It isn't worth the effort to the Nordykes, who I am sure could not have paid Don's fees themselves in hopes of winning, and it isn't worth the effort to Don, who knew a long time ago that it was a very, very long shot bet. He'd have been far better off spending the same time on paying clients or pro bono cases with better prognoses. I hope he gets paid by the county, and I hope it makes them an example to others, but I'm not presently optimistic.

And that's why we were all happy to be able to thank Sally Nordyke in person at the wrap party, along with Don Kilmer and Alan Gura. Because it's about more, for them and for us.

7x57

artherd
09-26-2009, 2:53 PM
Nothing new under the sun, really.

Yeah, just the most important supreme court case in history. Nothing to see, move along here folks.

jdberger
09-26-2009, 3:14 PM
Bottom line is, in this particular "Nordyke V King" issue, is, follow the money...

Either way it goes why is it important for the 2A folks, especially in CA where carrying is not allowed much at all.

What money?

And what does Nordyke have to do with "carrying". It's a Gunshow case.

Please. Pay attention.

There will be a quiz.

bwiese
09-26-2009, 3:39 PM
Mayors Against Illegal Guns - it's not just for felon-indicted mayors anymore! Looks like they just grab random mayor names for their list.

Hat tip to Dave Hardy's Arms and the Law website:

http://medinagazette.northcoastnow.com/2009/09/26/mayor-anti-gun-group-misused-my-name/

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Mayor: Anti-gun group misused my name

By: Allison Wood
September 26th, 2009
(http://medinagazette.northcoastnow.com/2009/09/26/mayor-anti-gun-group-misused-my-name/#comments)

BRUNSWICK — Mayor Dale Strasser says he is a member of the National Rifle Association and has never supported any gun control organizations. So he was surprised to discover that pro-gun control organization Mayors Against Illegal Guns said he was a member in its promotional materials.

“My name should have never been on that material,” Strasser said. “They used my name without my consent.”

In the last few weeks, he has received numerous phone calls and e-mails after the NRA sent out a postcard to area members saying he joined a national anti-gun group and urged members to call Strasser to complain. “It is critical that your mayor disassociate himself from the anti-gun group and you do your part by contacting his office today and urging him to withdraw his MAIG membership,” the postcard said.

Strasser is up for re-election in November and faces At-large Councilman Gary Werner.

Mayors Against Illegal Guns is an organization founded by New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg that is “dedicated to making America’s cities safer by cracking down on illegal guns,” according to its Web site.

When Strasser contacted the organization, he was told City Manager Bob Zienkowski had sent in a membership form, but MAIG used Strasser’s name by mistake. The form, which states the group’s principles, includes Zienkowski’s signature. Strasser’s name is nowhere on the document. In a letter to the NRA, Zienkowski requested Strasser be removed from all materials because he never joined Mayors Against Illegal Guns, and it was the city manager who joined as the leader of Brunswick.

“Within these duties, I received the information and signed the document in support of this coalition,” Zienkowski said in the letter. “Mayor Strasser was unaware of this information, did not sign, nor has any responsibility for responding to such requests.”

Zienkowski said Friday he joined MAIG in September 2008 after hearing about it at a meeting of the Northeast Ohio Mayors and City Managers Association. He has since dropped his membership. “In principle, this was a good thing to sign on to,” he said. “I ended up doing some more homework and saw there were partisan viewpoints on there. To me, this raises a red flag.”

Zienkowski said he also has noticed the content of MAIG’s Web site at mayorsagainstillegalguns.org has changed within the last couple of weeks. Along with Strasser, several other mayors throughout the state have said their names were used by MAIG without their permission, according to an article by the Buckeye Firearms Association.

One example is Rittman Mayor Bill Robertson, who said he signed something at the meeting of the Northeast Ohio Mayors and City Managers Association, but was not aware it was a membership statement for any organization.

Like Strasser, Robertson’s name also was used in promotional materials.

MAIG did not immediately return an e-mail request for comment.


Contact Allison Wood at (330) 721-4050 or allisonwood@ohio.net (emailto://allisonwood@ohio.net).

oaklander
09-26-2009, 4:26 PM
Harley,

Your posts are not making sense. Then when someone calls you out on it, you post something else that is just as confusing.

Why don't you just come out and say whatever you are trying to say and be done with it?

Bottom line - Nordyke is an important case.

Bottom line - It was good that we showed up.

Bottom line - You missed a very nice lunch.

I appreciate your candor, I have been a 2A advocate by way of supporting for a very long time.

Bottom line is, in this particular "Nordyke V King" issue, is, follow the money...

Either way it goes why is it important for the 2A folks, especially in CA where carrying is not allowed much at all.

CCW is not something easily obtained unless greasing a palm many mention, which is very bad to be honest. Other states are going blatantly in the opposite direction as CA. Migration, might be the answer.

HowardW56
09-26-2009, 4:29 PM
I appreciate your candor, I have been a 2A advocate by way of supporting for a very long time.

Bottom line is, in this particular "Nordyke V King" issue, is, follow the money...

Either way it goes why is it important for the 2A folks, especially in CA where carrying is not allowed much at all.

CCW is not something easily obtained unless greasing a palm many mention, which is very bad to be honest. Other states are going blatantly in the opposite direction as CA. Migration, might be the answer.


WHAT ???

trashman
09-26-2009, 5:01 PM
Bottom line - Nordyke is an important case.

Bottom line - It was good that we showed up.

Bottom line - You missed a very nice lunch.

Well put, Kevin. And besides that.... oh waiter, WAITER!...I'll some of what Mr. Harley is smoking, please.

--Neill

7x57
09-26-2009, 5:09 PM
Hmm. The handle is "Harley Quinn," that is "harlequin." Something of a joker or clown. In recent memory, that is the name of the comic-book Joker's sidekick.

Is that a clue that Harley Quinn is more interested in trolling than gun rights?

7x57

HowardW56
09-26-2009, 5:25 PM
Hmm. The handle is "Harley Quinn," that is "harlequin." Something of a joker or clown. In recent memory, that is the name of the comic-book Joker's sidekick.

Is that a clue that Harley Quinn is more interested in trolling than gun rights?

7x57

Based on how confused he appears to be, I wonder if he needs instructions on the use of a urinal, or if he feels that it is an evil trick...

trashman
09-26-2009, 5:37 PM
Hmm. The handle is "Harley Quinn," that is "harlequin." Something of a joker or clown. In recent memory, that is the name of the comic-book Joker's sidekick.


See also 'bodice ripper': it's also the name of some really awful but highly persistent (http://www.eharlequin.com/) women's fiction (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romance_novel).

--Neill

7x57
09-26-2009, 5:41 PM
See also 'bodice ripper'

I guess I wouldn't have included girl-porn, as it's a trade name and can be anything.

In fact, there is some faint historical justification for the name--at various times and places the Harlequin character in a play could be a figure of romance instead of or as well as being an agile buffoon.

7x57

Harley Quinn
09-26-2009, 10:51 PM
Ok.

We'll just have to wait for the panel to sit again, and take it up then. Enough theories going on, and has for 100s of posts:rolleyes:

Meanwhile here is background on it. I know, I have been told by others but it is a good read anyway.

http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/Nordyke_v._King

This is a funny group to be sure:p
Regards

Experimentalist
09-26-2009, 11:06 PM
... And besides that.... oh waiter, WAITER!...I'll some of what Mr. Harley is smoking, please.

--Neill

Too funny.

jdberger
09-26-2009, 11:10 PM
Ok.

We'll just have to wait for the panel to sit again, and take it up then. Enough theories going on, and has for 100s of posts:rolleyes:

Meanwhile here is background on it. I know, I have been told by others but it is a good read anyway.

http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/Nordyke_v._King

This is a funny group to be sure:p
Regards

Don't read the URL...

Don't do it.....!

BTW - I've decided to charge you for lunch. I don't care that you weren't there. You can cover for Sally Nordyke.:p

Harley Quinn
09-27-2009, 12:09 AM
Don't read this one either:

http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/analysis-guns-chukas-and-the-states/#more-9302

Taste


That conclusion, however, conflicts directly with the Ninth Circuit Court’s decision last Monday in Nordyke, et al., v. King, et al. (Circuit docket 07-15763). (The Ninth Circuit ruling was discussed in this earlier post.) That is the sort of conflict that can lead the Supreme Court to step in to resolve the dispute. If the lawyers in the Nordyke case pursue an early appeal to the Court (a decision not yet made), both cases could be up for consideration together by the Justices.



This some more I have read:
http://www.potowmack.org/nordyke.html

Mas:

In August 1999, Alameda County ("County") passed an ordinance making illegal the possession of firearms on County property ("Ordinance"). In pertinent part, the Ordinance reads: "Every person who brings onto or possesses on county property a firearm, loaded or unloaded, or ammunition for a firearm is guilty of a misdemeanor."Alameda County, Cal., Ordinance § 9.12.120(b). The Ordinance would forbid the presence of firearms at gun shows, such as Nordyke's, held at the Fairgrounds. As a practical matter, the Ordinance makes it unlikely that a gun show could profitably be held there.

Seeking to prevent the Ordinance's enforcement, Nordyke brought suit against the County in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. Nordyke applied for a temporary restraining order, claiming that the Ordinance was preempted by state gun regulations and that it violated the First Amendment's free speech guarantee. The district court judge treated the application as one for a preliminary injunction and denied it. The judge noted that under either test for a preliminary injunction, a litigant must at least show a fair chance of success on the merits and ruled that Nordyke had failed to do so. Because he concluded that Nordyke had little chance of success on the merits, he did not reach the balance of the hardships determination. Nordyke then filed this timely interlocutory appeal.

We certified Nordyke's preemption claim to the California Supreme Court asking the following question: "Does state law regulating the possession of firearms and gun shows preempt a municipal ordinance prohibiting gun possession on county property"? Nordyke v. King ("Nordyke I"), 229 F.3d 1266, 1267 (9th Cir. 2000).


Hmm looks like money to me:D


Regards

oaklander
09-27-2009, 12:19 AM
What are you getting at?

Hmm looks like money to me:D

Harley Quinn
09-27-2009, 12:36 AM
What are you getting at?

I made a comment that follow the money for this particular item, some disagreed and fell into bully tactics and called me a troll...I see that it is about money, more than it is about freedom of rights, regarding 2A...Simple.

Some other circumstances have come into play, but bottom line is one who wants to do a business on property that is not legal to do it at, if revolving around firearms...

I am not a troll, and I hope that if it proves to be something that is truly for the freedoms of the people, and gun rights that it goes our way...

I don't care if I go to the fairgrounds or the Hilton for a show, but the Nordykes do...

The other cases that are holding it up need to be concluded true. The panel knew about it long before the other day, games you have to love um:D

Regards

cbn620
09-27-2009, 12:38 AM
Where in the world have you proven that this case is about money? This is ludicrous, you've yet to make a cogent point. None of us are mind readers, the only way we can pick a cohesive argument out of your random thoughts is for you to construct it for us.

jdberger
09-27-2009, 12:41 AM
Ah.

I see. DonkeyHat somehow thinks that the Nordykes are duping us into supporting their bid to return gunshows to the fairgrounds.

After all, payments on Ferraris are pretty steep.

The "incorporation thing" is just a trick to get us involved.....

Holy crap....we've all been played!

berto
09-27-2009, 12:49 AM
I made a comment that follow the money for this particular item, some disagreed and fell into bully tactics and called me a troll...I see that it is about money, more than it is about freedom of rights, regarding 2A...Simple.

Some other circumstances have come into play, but bottom line is one who wants to do a business on property that is not legal to do it at, if revolving around firearms...

I am not a troll, and I hope that if it proves to be something that is truly for the freedoms of the people, and gun rights that it goes our way...

I don't care if I go to the fairgrounds or the Hilton for a show, but the Nordykes do...

The other cases that are holding it up need to be concluded true. The panel knew about it long before the other day, games you have to love um:D

Regards

Renting muni properties is often far cheaper than renting private property so you're right, it is about money. The Alameda County fairgrounds meet state requirements for hosting gunshows. An arbitrary nonsensical decision by an ill informed and biased elected body is costing good upstanding people part of their livelihood.

It's interesting that a different elected body subject to the same idiocy has placed a bill on the governor's desk banning gunshows at another publicly owned location. That same location hosts a yearly event that some would call a sleaze fest yet there's been no move to shut it down in the name of safety or decency, think of the children indeed.

artherd
09-27-2009, 1:07 AM
I see that it is about money, more than it is about freedom of rights, regarding 2A...Simple.

I dare you to look Sally Nordyke in the eye and say that to her face.

hoffmang
09-27-2009, 3:20 AM
Harley.

Nordyke is all about the money you would not be willing to pay to go to a gun show. Gun shows could happen in Alameda county but they would require a two night minimum at a hotel. Seeing as that would drive the door ticket price from $10 to $400 on average I think your right to acquire firearms or peaceably assemble would be chilled.

You support Alameda's right to place a 500% tax on books, too, right?

-Gene

7x57
09-27-2009, 6:55 AM
I made a comment that follow the money for this particular item, some disagreed and fell into bully tactics and called me a troll...


Gosh. Someone disagreed with your unsupported opinion. However will you survive emotionally? They even cited facts, the bullies.


I see that it is about money, more than it is about freedom of rights, regarding 2A...Simple.


You clearly either can't or won't think. Why bother with the time and trouble of posting here yourself when we could just replace you with a simple script*:


while (1)
{
calguns << "I think it's all about money, so there!" << endl;
}


(* Yeah, so it's not in a scripting language. Sue me.)


I am not a troll, and I hope that if it proves to be something that is truly for the freedoms of the people, and gun rights that it goes our way...


You hope it, but are absolutely impervious to reason and simply will not listen to the most basic things people have told you on this thread. Your hope will be in vain, because you simply cannot learn from anyone else.

I suppose the difference between that and a troll is that the troll intends to stir up trouble over nothing. You just do it as a byproduct of your posting strategy:

1) Post an ill-informed opinion based on no facts whatsoever.
2) Whine that everyone is mean when they point this out.
3) Stick your fingers in your ears and just repeat your opinion over and over while going "la la la, I can't heeeear you, la la la."

We like to have a rational debate here, and compare ideas with facts. That just seems to annoy you to no end.

7x57

Harley Quinn
09-27-2009, 9:03 AM
Harley.

Nordyke is all about the money you would not be willing to pay to go to a gun show. Gun shows could happen in Alameda county but they would require a two night minimum at a hotel. Seeing as that would drive the door ticket price from $10 to $400 on average I think your right to acquire firearms or peaceably assemble would be chilled.

You support Alameda's right to place a 500% tax on books, too, right?

-Gene

Still about money and you can't change it, by saying I want books taxed, either...

Freedom for the people to own a firearm, is not connected as far as I am concerned...To buy sell and distribute might become a problem, to have things related, will get more expensive, true...

7X57 you are off the mark amigo, big time...You and the ones who are debating are not debating the case as I see it, you are back slapping and all the other things that go along with others, that might see it slightly different. Why it is being reviewed again and waiting for SCOTUS...Duh

Yea you are a bully of sorts, someone mentioned Sally face to face, fine let it rip...

So here it is...
Sort of like buying a firearm for protection and needing a nice basic pistol, over purchasing a very expensive one for your hobby...Things are slightly out of whack, why I say, "follow the money"...

Those who need it spelled out like in a court are just fooling themselves and others...As I mentioned before I go to many forums and this one about Nordyke, post after post, is not a debate about the root of the vine but the fruit...Sorry similar to criminal, it has to be honest, forthright.
Poison the plant, you get no fruit...

Regards

Hopi
09-27-2009, 9:16 AM
Freedom for the people to own a firearm, is not connected as far as I am concerned...To buy sell and distribute might become a problem, to have things related, will get more expensive, true...


7X57 you are off the mark amigo, big time...You and the ones who are debating are not debating the case as I see it, you are back slapping and all the other things that go along with others, that might see it slightly different. Why it is being reviewed again and waiting for SCOTUS...Duh



So here it is...
Sort of like buying a firearm for protection and needing a nice basic pistol, over purchasing a very expensive one for your hobby...Things are slightly out of whack, why I say, "follow the money"...


Those who need it spelled out like in a court are just fooling themselves and others...As I mentioned before I go to many forums and this one about Nordyke, post after post, is not a debate about the root of the vine but the fruit...Sorry similar to criminal, it has to be honest, forthright.
Poison the plant, you get no fruit...

Regards

Huh?

Can you try to explain the above more clearly?

oaklander
09-27-2009, 9:23 AM
????

Please spell out what you are insinuating. . .

Sorry similar to criminal, it has to be honest, forthright. Poison the plant, you get no fruit...

Harley Quinn
09-27-2009, 9:31 AM
I am not spelling it out real clearly, as far as the statement, no offense, LOL that is not honest either...

One of the reasons for higher court systems overruling lower (less informed, as a thought)..The ones who are now playing with the ball (case) are very knowledgeable...IMHO

So if it is not real clear, you have to come up with some of the picture, if stormy you can not see the trail as easy...

How is that :eek:

eda...
Yes ESL was pretty offensive for you sir... Not sticking to the reason I am against this now, and have been since the N's lost long ago...See no reason to continue under a misconception of why it is important for 2a:confused:

oaklander
09-27-2009, 9:34 AM
Harley, just come out and say what you want to say. . .

I am not spelling it out real clearly, as far as the statement, no offense, LOL that is not honest either...

One of the reasons for higher court systems overruling lower (less informed, as a thought)..The ones who are now playing with the ball (case) are very knowledgeable...IMHO

So if it is not real clear, you have to come up with some of the picture, if stormy you can not see the trail as easy...

How is that :eek:

Harley Quinn
09-27-2009, 9:37 AM
Harley, just come out and say what you want to say. . .

I have said it time and again, it is about making money on a product, not the 2a at all...

Regards

Lex Arma
09-27-2009, 10:03 AM
I have said it time and again, it is about making money on a product, not the 2a at all...

Regards

Since in a free country people exchange products and services by voluntary trade, using currency (money) in commercial transactions guaranteed by the contract law that is adjudicated in a court of law -- is your point that any right that is litigated that involves money is somehow less worthy of support?

E.g., If the government took your home without just compensation (see Amendment 5) and you hired a lawyer to protect your rights, (i.e., get you your constitutionally guaranteed just compensation) we should just assume that you are a money grubbing capitalist and your lawsuit (and your rights) are "just about the money?"

This case is about the issues raised in Palmer v. Thompson. {everybody gets to use the pool, or close the pool.} If the county wants to close the fairgrounds and build condos, that is their business. As long as they open the fairgrounds to commerce and entertainment involving other people's guns (the Scottish Games), then it should be open to the Nordyke's shows as well.

Harley Quinn
09-27-2009, 10:11 AM
Since in a free country people exchange products and services by voluntary trade, using currency (money) in commercial transactions guaranteed by the contract law that is adjudicated in a court of law -- is your point that any right that is litigated that involves money is somehow less worthy of support?

E.g., If the government took your home without just compensation (see Amendment 5) and you hired a lawyer to protect your rights, (i.e., get you your constitutionally guaranteed just compensation) we should just assume that you are a money grubbing capitalist and your lawsuit (and your rights) are "just about the money?"

This case is about the issues raised in Palmer v. Thompson. {everybody gets to use the pool, or close the pool.} If the county wants to close the fairgrounds and build condos, that is their business. As long as they open the fairgrounds to commerce and entertainment involving other people's guns (the Scottish Games), then it should be open to the Nordyke's shows as well.


Well, that is debateable and why it has gone on, as long as it has...

To misconstrue the idea that it has anything to do with the militia and firearm possession is not correct...

So if others are mentioning, in jest, being duped by Nordyke, or just riding the wagon for own reward...

Yep, that is what is happening IMHO...

It has come about because of other restrictions placed on firearm, on person or not...

I see it like a court room...No guns allowed for the ones not having the correct paperwork and background;)

Lex Arma
09-27-2009, 10:25 AM
Well, that is debateable and why it has gone on, as long as it has...

To misconstrue the idea that it has anything to do with the militia and firearm possession is not correct...

So if others are mentioning, in jest, being duped by Nordyke, or just riding the wagon for own reward...

Yep, that is what is happening IMHO...

It has come about because of other restrictions placed on firearm, on person or not...

I see it like a court room...No guns allowed for the ones not having the correct paperwork and background;)

Did you read Palmer v Thompson or not?

There may be some in the firearms business who "dupe" civil rights activists into supporting their profit margins. The Nordykes are not in that category. They lost money litigating Nordyke 97. They have lost money in this case. Sally works at a nursing home during the week so that she can afford the mortgage on their home and she still holds shows at those venues where gun shows are still legal.

The next time you want to put your foot in your mouth (your choice), you might want to clean the bull**** off of it first. Then you won't have to live with the unpleasant aftertaste.

eaglemike
09-27-2009, 10:41 AM
Well, that is debateable and why it has gone on, as long as it has...

To misconstrue the idea that it has anything to do with the militia and firearm possession is not correct...

So if others are mentioning, in jest, being duped by Nordyke, or just riding the wagon for own reward...

Yep, that is what is happening IMHO...

It has come about because of other restrictions placed on firearm, on person or not...

I see it like a court room...No guns allowed for the ones not having the correct paperwork and background;)
Please be coherent, and write a complete sentence so I (and others) can understand what you are saying, ok?

Militia?? What militia?? Where did that come from? The Heller case clearly states that firearms ownership is an individual right. So - militia?? :confused:

Firearms? Surely the case does involve firearms.

What on earth are you talking about in the part of your post I highlighted?

pullnshoot25
09-27-2009, 10:42 AM
Damn Harley, someone must have REALLY elevated the urea level in your cheerios.

You sound like you should have never left East Germany. Crikey.

Harley Quinn
09-27-2009, 10:47 AM
Opinions, you have to love um:43:

The next time you want to put your foot in your mouth (your choice), you might want to clean the bull**** off of it first. Then you won't have to live with the unpleasant aftertaste.

Much more to it than one case, IMHO if that was the true, why are they waiting on 3 before SCOTUS???

Because the 9th does not want to make a decision that will be there for years and years and years...If they can allow, another court to make it for them, they will...And have...

http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1O184-PalmervThompson.html

Apples and oranges it appears to me...But then we could debate that also...

That is if you keep the name calling down to a minimum :p

Lex Arma
09-27-2009, 10:54 AM
You strongly inferred that my clients are duping civil rights activists into maintaining their profit margin. Back up your statement or retract it.

Harley Quinn
09-27-2009, 10:56 AM
Please be coherent, and write a complete sentence so I (and others) can understand what you are saying, ok?

Militia?? What militia?? Where did that come from? The Heller case clearly states that firearms ownership is an individual right. So - militia?? :confused:

Firearms? Surely the case does involve firearms.

What on earth are you talking about in the part of your post I highlighted?

Individuals are part and parcel to militia...You are just breaking it down rather than the whole of it...IMHO Yes like a scientist would if talking about why a pistol goes boom...

Each and every case has to stand on its own, as far as I am concerned and the root of this, is 2A, the vine or branch, is this, still relies on the root...

If you think this case is important for rights to ownership of firearms, think again...
My feeling anyway, without any name calling you will notice:D
Regards

freonr22
09-27-2009, 10:58 AM
omg. the never ending train wreck thread that has derailed and continues even if not on track. what is the current point to this pissing contest...

Harley Quinn
09-27-2009, 11:03 AM
You strongly inferred that my clients are duping civil rights activists into maintaining their profit margin. Back up your statement or retract it.


Well I am not going to play your game so, I guess I'll have to retract it...

Pretty obvious now why it has gone this way...Your own personal desire, and "money again"...

So if you feel that way about it, fine...

Lets not talk 2A lets attack me now, LOL... Sad to the max Lex...

So now you are going to say I am the one saying we are being duped???

If you are really who you represent...And feel it is important to your position...

Fine so be it...Retraction of what ever you feel is "right or wrong" we all have opinions, but apparantly not on this forum...

Others will read it, all or part...If it needs to be deleted, tell me more...

So did you win one for the gipper...NO

Regards

Harley Quinn
09-27-2009, 11:05 AM
omg. the never ending train wreck thread that has derailed and continues even if not on track. what is the current point to this pissing contest...

True about that, and Lex, took it to a new location.

Harley Quinn
09-27-2009, 11:08 AM
You strongly inferred that my clients are duping civil rights activists into maintaining their profit margin. Back up your statement or retract it.

No profile amigo, come forth now...Lets read it here.

Regards

HowardW56
09-27-2009, 11:11 AM
Harley

Your posture in this debate is like an interrogation tactic...

Keep needling the suspect with incorrect information until human nature forced them to correct you, giving you what you want to hear....

The problem is that you are barking up the wrong tree...

Harley Quinn
09-27-2009, 11:20 AM
Harley

Your posture in this debate is like an interrogation tactic...

Keep needling the suspect with incorrect information until human nature forced them to correct you, giving you what you want to hear....

The problem is that you are barking up the wrong tree...

No that is incorrect...I have an opinion that this is not 2A compatable...Simple.

Court room, and "Robert rules" are needed for debating here, as far as I am concerned, simple, opinions are good and others need to understand that, in debating..

Plato liked arguement (discussion) so do I...

You can't come up with what you are saying based on what I have mentioned...Root of the vine is still 2A...

Root being the "case", vine, fruit, being other items mentioned...

Regards

eaglemike
09-27-2009, 11:20 AM
Individuals are part and parcel to militia...You are just breaking it down rather than the whole of it...IMHO Yes like a scientist would if talking about why a pistol goes boom...

Each and every case has to stand on its own, as far as I am concerned and the root of this, is 2A, the vine or branch, is this, still relies on the root...

If you think this case is important for rights to ownership of firearms, think again...
My feeling anyway, without any name calling you will notice:D
Regards
Ummm, no. You are continuing to tie an individual right to militia. Again, see Heller. The individual has a right to own, use, and bear firearms. The right to bear is not clearly defined - at least it so seems at this point. The individual can clearly bear arms on private property ( assuming the individual is not a banned person). The right to self defense can include the use of firearms. What part of this are you in disagreement with?

Since we as "beings with God-given rights" are allowed to own firearms, it's stands logically that there must be commerce in firearms. The Nordyke case involves singling out legal traffic in legal goods, specifically firearms, and banning that from a public place. Are you debating this?

Is this a sincere discussion? Can you clearly address each point?

Harley Quinn
09-27-2009, 11:23 AM
Ummm, no. You are continuing to tie an individual right to militia. Again, see Heller. The individual has a right to own, use, and bear firearms. The right to bear is not clearly defined - at least it so seems at this point. The individual can clearly bear arms on private property ( assuming the individual is not a banned person). The right to self defense can include the use of firearms. What part of this are you in disagreement with?

Since we as "beings with God-given rights" are allowed to own firearms, it's stands logically that there must be commerce in firearms. The Nordyke case involves singling out legal traffic in legal goods, specifically firearms, and banning that from a public place. Are you debating this?

Is this a sincere discussion? Can you clearly address each point?

Ok, lets go to public schools, and debate the same issue...

Regards

eaglemike
09-27-2009, 11:26 AM
Ok, lets go to public schools, and debate the same issue...

Regards

Obviously, you fail. This is not a sincere discussion.

Harley Quinn
09-27-2009, 11:37 AM
Obviously, you fail. This is not a sincere discussion.

It is sincere, the term public is what you brought to the board...My remark was regarding your thoughts about public...How about the court room?

I am not a lawyer, others are just glad handing it and have been for 100s of posts...If serious is what you want, I have stated my position on this several times...

Why should I want to discuss it more??? I don't so we will let it go at that...

Lex has not come forth, proving his position, lets attack that statement...

You strongly inferred that my clients are duping civil rights activists into maintaining their profit margin. Back up your statement or retract it.


See his tactic is going to work if he does not show up and prove his position...I won't feel he is honest either...


Regards

eaglemike
09-27-2009, 11:45 AM
It is sincere, the term public is what you brought to the board...My remark was regarding your thoughts about public...How about the court room?

I am not a lawyer, others are just glad handing it and have been for 100s of posts...If serious is what you want, I have stated my position on this several times...

Why should I want to discuss it more??? I don't so we will let it go at that...

Lex has not come forth, proving his position, lets attack that statement...



See his tactic is going to work if he does not show up and prove his position...I won't feel he is honest either...


Regards
You do not clearly address points. You seek to deflect. You fail.

Lex Arma is a man of honor and integrity. Perhaps you do not recognize this, or know who he is. He might not have seen your "response" or might not wish to waste his valuable time.

Experimentalist
09-27-2009, 11:48 AM
Gentlemen:

At this point I am reminded of a favorite saying: "Never wrestle with a pig. All you get is muddy, and the pig likes it".

Harley Quinn
09-27-2009, 11:52 AM
You do not clearly address points. You seek to deflect. You fail.

Lex Arma is a man of honor and integrity. Perhaps you do not recognize this, or know who he is. He might not have seen your "response" or might not wish to waste his valuable time.

See that is where you are failing and he has also...I'll return tomorrow and read more about this whole case, several things have been mentioned and as I said I am sincere others just want to win their arguement...

It is already lost in the courts IMHO...Just has not died yet. I feel there are much more important cases pending.

That is where the money needs to go...Not to this one anymore...Simple...
But, the money has been spent, and the court will rule...

I hope whatever comes out of it, will be something positive for Firearms, and allow us to stay afloat, longer, that is...

Regards

Harley Quinn
09-27-2009, 11:55 AM
Gentlemen:

At this point I am reminded of a favorite saying: "Never wrestle with a pig. All you get is muddy, and the pig likes it".

See there you go again :43: Sad really, but that is why we are losing in many locations...

Others don't think we should have that type of thoughts and have firearms at our disposal...
Unable to debate without playing that card, at the same time:(

Courts rule, always have.:D

Regards

wildhawker
09-27-2009, 12:12 PM
Harley, you're acting like a troll. If you want to be a part of this community, knock it off.

Harley Quinn
09-27-2009, 12:26 PM
Harley, you're acting like a troll. If you want to be a part of this community, knock it off.


I guess it does look similar but is not really, reactions and actions are somewhat different...

I saw this at another location, it is where they are discussing it without the barbs...


The 9th Circuit decision not to decide, whilst not an official "split".....no decision therfore no process of split, is an effective split in that it has generated a large area of constitutionally significant law that cannot be ruled on in CA.

In many ways it is even more burdensome than an official split as no legal challenge, ruling or case law can be either pursued or ruled in CA in this area.

One question for the constitutional lawyers here would be, can any legislative legal change be implemented in this area in CA if it is currently wholly incapable if legitimate legal challenge?

If for example Governor Arnie signed AB 962 (?) into law he his creating law that in effect cannot be reviewed by the judicial arm of government.


Until tomorrow...

Regards

freonr22
09-27-2009, 12:31 PM
ohh no barbs really?????

http://thehighroad.us/showthread.php?t=412856

http://thehighroad.us/images/statusicon/post_old.gif September 25th, 2009, 07:39 PM #6 (http://thehighroad.us/showpost.php?p=5175817&postcount=6) Harley Quinn (http://thehighroad.us/member.php?u=33460)
Senior Member


Join Date: 08-08-06
Location: No. CA.
Posts: 3,062


"I am curious as to why so many are not able to comprehend the reason behind this delayhttp://thehighroad.us/images/smilies/uhoh2.gif

I have been over to Cal Guns and very few are making sense, most are being glib and joking around...WTHhttp://thehighroad.us/images/smilies/confused.gif

It is sort of aggravating to have read all the BS yesterday about the big court packing and luncheon and think that what they did by that had any way shape or form on this judgement or why...The bottom line is this...To many other important cases to watch before commiting...Simple.

Part of the process, get used to it guys...That is where it is going to be for some time now... All the pavers are being laid/greased, to restrictions, it appears." end quote

jdberger
09-27-2009, 12:36 PM
Don't waste your time, Hopi.

Harley Quinn
09-27-2009, 12:45 PM
ohh no barbs really?????

http://thehighroad.us/showthread.php?t=412856

http://thehighroad.us/images/statusicon/post_old.gif September 25th, 2009, 07:39 PM #6 (http://thehighroad.us/showpost.php?p=5175817&postcount=6) Harley Quinn (http://thehighroad.us/member.php?u=33460)
Senior Member


Join Date: 08-08-06
Location: No. CA.
Posts: 3,062


"I am curious as to why so many are not able to comprehend the reason behind this delayhttp://thehighroad.us/images/smilies/uhoh2.gif

I have been over to Cal Guns and very few are making sense, most are being glib and joking around...WTHhttp://thehighroad.us/images/smilies/confused.gif

It is sort of aggravating to have read all the BS yesterday about the big court packing and luncheon and think that what they did by that had any way shape or form on this judgement or why...The bottom line is this...To many other important cases to watch before commiting...Simple.

Part of the process, get used to it guys...That is where it is going to be for some time now... All the pavers are being laid/greased, to restrictions, it appears." end quote


That is a very true opinion IMHO...

Do you notice any personal attacks about it??? No Just an observation and one that is very heart felt...Sad really.

Regards

7x57
09-27-2009, 12:56 PM
How is that :eek:


Completely illiterate.

7x57

Harley Quinn
09-27-2009, 12:56 PM
That is a very true opinion IMHO...

Do you notice any personal attacks about it??? No Just an observation and one that is very heart felt...Sad really.

Regards

Plus, you will notice I did comment on it here, about the same time, others felt I was wrong then also...

So I posted more and got guano from many... Lets see "Lex's' credentials guys...

I put my profile up, some here, over at .us you can read more if you care...

My sig is my profile of sorts.

Regards

berto
09-27-2009, 1:05 PM
Lets see "Lex's' credentials guys...

Lex's credentials are well known and indisputable.

7x57
09-27-2009, 1:11 PM
Lex has not come forth, proving his position, lets attack that statement...


Harley,

Everybody on the board but, apparently, you knows that Lex Arma is Don Kilmer, the lawyer representing the Nordykes in their case as well as representing all of us in several other 2A cases. What you deserve is for Don to sue the pants off of you for defamation of character. Don is not the lawyer I'd want to face at the other table in such a lawsuit either.

Fortunately for you, he probably believes in the free exchange of ideas far too much to do it instead of just brushing you off like the flea you are. But it's not generally smart to make libellous statements on a public forum where they'll be archived forever without having something to back them up. We have already had one member sued for their statements here, and while that lawsuit is a meritless joke it's still a pain.

It's also a good idea to be literate enough to express yourself coherently, but perhaps you don't care how you portray yourself in public.

7x57

freonr22
09-27-2009, 1:13 PM
ummm speechless, there is nothing more that COULD be said at this point.

HowardW56
09-27-2009, 1:18 PM
Lex's credentials are well known and indisputable.

Absolutely!

HowardW56
09-27-2009, 1:22 PM
So I posted more and got guano from many... Lets see "Lex's' credentials guys...

Lex has argued this issue before the Ninth Circuit; he is very well versed in all of its aspects…

What do you bring to the table?

Harley Quinn
09-27-2009, 1:29 PM
Harley,

Everybody on the board but, apparently, you knows that Lex Arma is Don Kilmer, the lawyer representing the Nordykes in their case as well as representing all of us in several other 2A cases. What you deserve is for Don to sue the pants off of you for defamation of character. Don is not the lawyer I'd want to face at the other table in such a lawsuit either.

Fortunately for you, he probably believes in the free exchange of ideas far too much to do it instead of just brushing you off like the flea you are. But it's not generally smart to make libellous statements on a public forum where they'll be archived forever without having something to back them up. We have already had one member sued for their statements here, and while that lawsuit is a meritless joke it's still a pain.

It's also a good idea to be literate enough to express yourself coherently, but perhaps you don't care how you portray yourself in public.

7x57


Well, we will have to wait it out, and see how good he is... Interesting though.

Get someone who mentions similar findings that have gone to this extreme.

Right up to the highest appeal in CA.
And, I am a troll/wrong, in my opinion.
Oh, well, it is interesting for sure...

I hope for he, and his client I am wrong, but we will just have to wait.

I will say, thanks for the bio.

Regards

7x57
09-27-2009, 2:02 PM
I hope for he, and his client I am wrong, but we will just have to wait.


So you make reckless statements and you're not even sure of them? Does it even occur to you to look before you leap?

I'm done with you. If I can bite my tongue, anyway.

7x57

Harley Quinn
09-27-2009, 2:17 PM
Reckless, not sure about that... Community was mentioned before..The forums do have them for sure. Interesting word...

My heart is with firearms as I have mentioned. This is also my last post regarding this thread, at this location.

When it surfaces after the time frame, working towards the end, then we can hash it more... Hopefully it won't be long...

If you need the last word, go for it...

Freedom is not free, I read, true.

Regards

oaklander
09-27-2009, 3:02 PM
I'll take the liberty of writing like you do so that you can understand me better:

-------------------

Last word no, more like summary it is.

Join date 2006 you, yet no knowledge of the case.

Wrong you are shown, hidden agenda maybe :D

-------------------

Do us all a favor and refrain from posting here until you can:

1) Learn to construct proper sentences.

2) Learn to make cogent arguments.

3) Learn what you are talking about.

4) Learn who you are talking to.

It is that simple.

HowardW56
09-27-2009, 3:08 PM
I'll take the liberty of writing like you do so that you can understand me better:

-------------------

Last word no, more like summary it is.

Join date 2006 you, yet no knowledge of the case.

Wrong you are shown, hidden agenda maybe :D


:rofl: :nuts: :clap:

wildhawker
09-27-2009, 3:20 PM
Holy hell Oak- zing!

pullnshoot25
09-27-2009, 3:50 PM
So simple, even a caveman can understand it...

eaglemike
09-27-2009, 4:58 PM
See that is where you are failing and he has also...I'll return tomorrow and read more about this whole case, several things have been mentioned and as I said I am sincere others just want to win their arguement...

It is already lost in the courts IMHO...Just has not died yet. I feel there are much more important cases pending.

That is where the money needs to go...Not to this one anymore...Simple...
But, the money has been spent, and the court will rule...

I hope whatever comes out of it, will be something positive for Firearms, and allow us to stay afloat, longer, that is...

Regards
Ummm, no. You did not address or acknowledge any of the points I posted. You instead attempt to distract and deflect.

Edit: this is off topic, but appropriate given your post, IMHO. Can you clearly identify your contributions to Pro-2A activities in California? I am able to do this. Most if not all members of this forum are able to clearly identify their activities in support of the 2A in Ca. Something of a litmus test, one might say.......

hoffmang
09-27-2009, 7:49 PM
Don is the only lawyer in North America who has gotten a federal court to incorporate the Second Amendment, and in California no less. He was just name gun rights defender of the year by CCRKBA & SAF on Saturday.

I'd call those credentials.

yellowfin
09-27-2009, 7:52 PM
Don is the only lawyer in North America who has gotten a federal court to incorporate the Second Amendment, and in California no less.Which unfortunately, not at all to diminish the work as it was stellar, ended up as a 99 yard TD kickoff return called back for a bogus holding penalty. You, I, and everyone wishes the points could be still on the board. Perfect work just dumb luck at the end.

To continue the football metaphor, is there any way to block the 9th (or any) Circuit's punt? I know courts can issue a writ to enforce their rulings and/or direct action, and can in fact give instructions to lower courts, but can the SCOTUS issue a directive telling a lower court to knock off the clowning if need be? Something tells me the courts in the 2nd Circuit as well as the circuit court itself will squirm even more than the CA courts will. NY's (in)justice system seems to have the heads I win tails you lose routine down to a science.

artherd
09-27-2009, 9:40 PM
That is where the money needs to go...Not to this one anymore...Simple...
But, the money has been spent, and the court will rule...

I hope whatever comes out of it, will be something positive for Firearms, and allow us to stay afloat, longer, that is...

You are making a lot of presumptive statements about money. I know where the money (or rather lack thereof) has gone in this case. It looks something like this: Don and Sally have spent millions litigating a case worth thousands.

Produce facts or kindly shut the **** up.

artherd
09-27-2009, 9:57 PM
Lets see "Lex's' credentials guys...

In Lex's signature you will find his name. Donald Kilmer. If you want to know who that is, you ought to read the Complaint or any other filing in Nordyke.