Originally Posted by FABIO GETS GOOSED!!!
Here is a quiz, which is from 2007 and which is from 2012? This:
6 years of appeals and they "won" exactly the same thing they already had when they started!
It's been a little while since I've seen you post. Welcome back from the holidays.
Your quotes are readily distinguished.
"... the unqualified word, “event,” that preserves the possibility ... including Plaintiffs’ gun shows."
"... the County affirmatively asserts that Plaintiffs, when conducting a gun show ..."
The difference would be clearer if you included this language in the latter:
"The County represents that a sturdy cable attaching the firearm to a fixture, such as a table, would suffice ..."
This is a gross departure from the county's prior stance. You wouldn't buy a beanie baby if you couldn't see it first because it was offsite in a DOJ approved opaque container, would you?
The plaintiffs got the relief they wanted. The county is now required to interpret their own ordinance in such a manner as to allow gun shows to be conducted with firearms available to be fondled by prospective customers. I would call that a "win."
The attorney fees are only at issue after the merits are decided. If you "win" a personal injury case but don't get attorney fees, is that suddenly a loss?
You are welcome to criticize, but many of us realize this wasn't a victory by default in a super gun-friendly jurisdiction. Lex Arma did a phenomenal job on a protracted nightmare of a case, battling Sauron in the depths of Mordor.