Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > POLITICS, LITIGATION AND ACTIVISM > 2nd Amend. Litigation Updates & Legal Discussion
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

2nd Amend. Litigation Updates & Legal Discussion Discuss California 2A related litigation and legal topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #241  
Old 07-17-2011, 9:53 AM
hoghunter7mm hoghunter7mm is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 30
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

When I was first convicted years ago, I remember reading in a NRA magazine, when this law was fresh and new, and they said that they really didn't care about helping people, it was about grabbing guns without due process and NRA was right. But I guess the NRA doesn't view me as a law abiding citizen anymore or it's leavung up to me and my state to sort it out, while the feds still say no
Reply With Quote
  #242  
Old 07-17-2011, 9:57 AM
hoghunter7mm hoghunter7mm is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 30
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Donating to the nra and voting for pro gun politicans hasn't a difference either. Hopefully with enough combined effort something will change
Reply With Quote
  #243  
Old 07-17-2011, 10:38 AM
hoghunter7mm hoghunter7mm is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 30
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Wouldn't it make a bit more sense for all who have tried to test the waters on this law, to combine into one big voice and a huge lawsuit, then smaller enties attacking it at different times? It's does appear that Donald has some standing on this issue for now and he has taken California gun owners and CADOJ understanding of firearm ownership to new heigjts. I feel that firearm owners are on a roll and taking back some turf! But we all know that this law is the most important one of all for the antis and will fight to keep it alive. CADOJ says law needs to change and NICS says it will never happen.
Reply With Quote
  #244  
Old 07-17-2011, 11:02 AM
BigBamBoo's Avatar
BigBamBoo BigBamBoo is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Redding,CA.
Posts: 3,943
iTrader: 43 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonyca View Post
What happened in that case? Was he charged? I can't find an update.

The judge was arrested for felony DV. I have no idea what happened and he is innocent until proven guilty. The cases this thread is about could never be a felony since misdemeanor DV can be for "the least touching", and some prohibiting DV arena charges don't involve touching at all.

For some strange reason ....there is not much follow up on this case. Hmmm
__________________
Bring hay for my horse....wine for my men....and mud for my turtle!

"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity."
- Sigmund Freud

Quote:
Originally Posted by ar15barrels View Post
It makes it bigger and longer.
Reply With Quote
  #245  
Old 07-17-2011, 11:03 AM
hoghunter7mm hoghunter7mm is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 30
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Or are we just chipping away?? Thanks to all that has giving me some hope and insight on this issue! I'm headed over to the Madison society and donate. Thanks Donald... You da man!!
Reply With Quote
  #246  
Old 07-17-2011, 11:25 AM
anthonyca anthonyca is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 5,115
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hoghunter7mm View Post
When I was first convicted years ago, I remember reading in a NRA magazine, when this law was fresh and new, and they said that they really didn't care about helping people, it was about grabbing guns without due process and NRA was right. But I guess the NRA doesn't view me as a law abiding citizen anymore or it's leavung up to me and my state to sort it out, while the feds still say no
Congress will not fix this issue. The NRA doesn't want to be seen as helping "wife beaters" ( we all know that is not what many of the people who have been lautenberged are) your only hope is the courts, and this is the best case I have seen so far.

Skoien and the other big one that went to circuit courts, were brought by terrible plaintiffs, who were still on probation when arrested, had multiple past convictions for minor battery, and were represented by a criminal defense lawyer.

This case is headed by Donald Kilmer, the first man in the history of the USA to get a federal court to rule that the second amendment was a RIGHT, ( before it went en banc when the other justices read it and said , holy $&(/!) in the 9th circuit of all fn courts!

This is the case.
Reply With Quote
  #247  
Old 07-17-2011, 11:47 AM
hoghunter7mm hoghunter7mm is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 30
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Thank you... Well said
Reply With Quote
  #248  
Old 07-17-2011, 12:17 PM
VW*Mike's Avatar
VW*Mike VW*Mike is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: holding the Orange County line
Posts: 1,266
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

This being one issue, and a good one to fight. A lot of B.S. stuff can be made to look a lot worse then it is. Perspective is everything. Your situation saddens me. Unfortunately it happens all too often and I wish you the best of luck. Some charges do carry "cruel" punishments, while not breaking rocks, it can effect people their entire lives.

This and some other changes I think need to be made for people who commit crimes in general. I think the attitude needs to be changed from "once a criminal, always a criminal". My personal theory is on this, is after they have served their time, paid their debt, they are released back in to a society they are no longer able to fit into. Marking on rental applications they have been convicted of a crime. When they go look for a job, they are denied a decent job. They can be harassed at a traffic stop for having a blinker out, pulled out of the car and searched. Can't vote, can't own firearms, etc. I think this in itself pushes them back the other way. People make mistakes, period. We all do. We have all been young and dumb.

I personally think, after their debt has been paid, after their probation and parole is up, they be allowed to be free and clear of such obstacles. Obviously, career criminals are just that, and wouldn't fall in this category, but stuff like juvenile crime, minor offenses, stuff like that is no reason to write someone off forever.
Reply With Quote
  #249  
Old 07-17-2011, 12:25 PM
dad's Avatar
dad dad is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 870
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hoghunter7mm View Post
When I was first convicted years ago, I remember reading in a NRA magazine, when this law was fresh and new, and they said that they really didn't care about helping people, it was about grabbing guns without due process and NRA was right. But I guess the NRA doesn't view me as a law abiding citizen anymore or it's leavung up to me and my state to sort it out, while the feds still say no
Did the court(s) tell you of the 10 year gun ban? Did the court(s), or any one official, tell you of Lautenberg and life time gun ban?
__________________
A nation of sheep, breeds a government of wolves!
Reply With Quote
  #250  
Old 07-17-2011, 12:27 PM
Westerner Westerner is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 92
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonyca View Post
Congress will not fix this issue. The NRA doesn't want to be seen as helping "wife beaters" ( we all know that is not what many of the people who have been lautenberged are) your only hope is the courts, and this is the best case I have seen so far.

Skoien and the other big one that went to circuit courts, were brought by terrible plaintiffs, who were still on probation when arrested, had multiple past convictions for minor battery, and were represented by a criminal defense lawyer.

This case is headed by Donald Kilmer, the first man in the history of the USA to get a federal court to rule that the second amendment was a RIGHT, ( before it went en banc when the other justices read it and said , holy $&(/!) in the 9th circuit of all fn courts!

This is the case.
I'm also really shocked that the NRA isn't backing, or mentioning the Schrader vs Holder case. A case which is only a misdemeanor charge . A guy losing his RKBA for trying to defend himself from thugs trying to jump him. Not to mention the incident happening in the 60's
Reply With Quote
  #251  
Old 07-17-2011, 12:29 PM
pointedstick's Avatar
pointedstick pointedstick is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 566
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hoghunter7mm View Post
Donating to the nra and voting for pro gun politicans hasn't a difference either. Hopefully with enough combined effort something will change
I know you're frustrated, and I probably would be too! But we have to chip away and pick the low-hanging fruit first. The reason we went after handgun bans in DC and Chicago was because they were absolutely indefensible. Those cases gave us strong legal foundations and a great deal of momentum. Eventually we'll manage to overturn things like the NFA and the GCA, but if we'd started there, the courts would have said no, and the press would have declared RKBA to be dead forever.
Reply With Quote
  #252  
Old 07-17-2011, 1:04 PM
hoghunter7mm hoghunter7mm is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 30
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

At the time that I was convicted, the law was fresh and new and the courts, court papers and even mentioned me losing my rights until I was refused a gun purchase and called CADOJ and they informed me that I had to wait ten years and than I could mark 'no' in the dv column and would then be able to purchase guns again. So I waited the ten years and was able to purchase a few handguns and rifles. Then a couple of years back, I was refused again...this time it was the federal law and CA decided to go along with the feds... I think alot of it having to do with Wyoming losing their appeal. So here I sit...banned again
Reply With Quote
  #253  
Old 07-17-2011, 6:58 PM
harrison44 harrison44 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 12
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

I would also like to say thank you mr. Kilmer. You da man!!
Reply With Quote
  #254  
Old 07-21-2011, 3:57 PM
M107A1 M107A1 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 44
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Don Kilmer submitted a request for an extension to file amended complaint yesterday.

http://www.archive.org/download/gov....15824.25.0.pdf

Last edited by M107A1; 07-21-2011 at 4:08 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #255  
Old 07-21-2011, 4:25 PM
anthonyca anthonyca is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 5,115
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by M107A1 View Post
Don Kilmer submitted a request for an extension to file amended complaint yesterday.

http://www.archive.org/download/gov....15824.25.0.pdf
Thank you for the update. More waiting........... It's not easy.
Reply With Quote
  #256  
Old 07-22-2011, 8:59 AM
DURAMAX DURAMAX is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 5
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dad View Post
Did the court(s) tell you of the 10 year gun ban? Did the court(s), or any one official, tell you of Lautenberg and life time gun ban?
yes and no to the above questions...i am a few months away from my 10 year ban being up..kinda curious as to what the outcome will be if i try to purchase a gun. i just learned about the lautenberg the other day and im quite sad as i had looked forward to being able to hunt again. i was doing research on the 10 year prohibition and just making sure i didnt have to perform any further steps to get reinstated so to speak...at that time i found out about lautenberg. this has me a little upset.
does anyone know how long the system takes to update once your prohibition has expired? i think i am life banned though as i was convicted of 422.
Reply With Quote
  #257  
Old 07-22-2011, 9:08 AM
DURAMAX DURAMAX is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 5
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hoghunter7mm View Post
wait ten years and than I could mark 'no' in the dv column
do you know of anywhere in writing this exists or was it word of mouth?
Reply With Quote
  #258  
Old 07-22-2011, 9:53 AM
mofugly13's Avatar
mofugly13 mofugly13 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 618
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

My GF's cousin recently was asking me about getting a gun. The he told me about his misdo DV conviction from 12 or so years ago. He said that when he agreed to the charge, he was told he could get it expunged after ten years. So he did. He went through the whole process and had it expunged. I told him he'd still be prohibited federally, and I could see his heart sink. His DV incident was another BS situation, where he inadvertently injured his GF's sister, trying to keep her out of his vehicle, and now he is banned for life.
__________________
No government deprives its citizens of rights without asserting that its actions are "reasonable" and "necessary" for high-sounding reasons such as "public safety."
A right that can be regulated is no right at all, only a temporary privilege dependent upon the good will of the very government
officials that such right is designed to constrain.
Reply With Quote
  #259  
Old 07-22-2011, 10:20 AM
Maestro Pistolero's Avatar
Maestro Pistolero Maestro Pistolero is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 3,889
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

There are so many BS cases like this and they are growing in number everyday. The threshold for a DV conviction is so low that, once charged, it's almost impossible NOT to be convicted. This is an important effort.
__________________
www.christopherjhoffman.com

The Second Amendment is the one right that is so fundamental that the inability to exercise it, should the need arise, would render all other rights null and void. Dead people have no rights.
Magna est veritas et praevalebit
Reply With Quote
  #260  
Old 07-22-2011, 11:12 AM
hoghunter7mm hoghunter7mm is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 30
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

I'm now wondering how many that have been robbed, assualted,raped and murdered due to this law?
Reply With Quote
  #261  
Old 07-22-2011, 11:47 AM
sholling's Avatar
sholling sholling is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,094
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hoghunter7mm View Post
I'm now wondering how many that have been robbed, assualted,raped and murdered due to this law?
Trust me it doesn't matter one bit to the supporters of this law.
__________________
"Government is the great fiction, through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else." --FREDERIC BASTIAT--

Proud Life Member: National Rifle Association and the Second Amendment Foundation.

Disappointed Life Member: California Rifle & Pistol Association
Reply With Quote
  #262  
Old 07-22-2011, 5:37 PM
dad's Avatar
dad dad is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 870
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mofugly13 View Post
My GF's cousin recently was asking me about getting a gun. The he told me about his misdo DV conviction from 12 or so years ago. He said that when he agreed to the charge, he was told he could get it expunged after ten years. So he did. He went through the whole process and had it expunged. I told him he'd still be prohibited federally, and I could see his heart sink. His DV incident was another BS situation, where he inadvertently injured his GF's sister, trying to keep her out of his vehicle, and now he is banned for life.
I take it the court didn't tell him anything of/about Lautenberg !
__________________
A nation of sheep, breeds a government of wolves!
Reply With Quote
  #263  
Old 07-22-2011, 5:52 PM
andytothemax's Avatar
andytothemax andytothemax is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 149
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DURAMAX View Post
yes and no to the above questions...i am a few months away from my 10 year ban being up..kinda curious as to what the outcome will be if i try to purchase a gun. i just learned about the lautenberg the other day and im quite sad as i had looked forward to being able to hunt again. i was doing research on the 10 year prohibition and just making sure i didnt have to perform any further steps to get reinstated so to speak...at that time i found out about lautenberg. this has me a little upset.
does anyone know how long the system takes to update once your prohibition has expired? i think i am life banned though as i was convicted of 422.
You can check your eligibility using a DOJ form that you send in: http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/forms/pdf/pfecapp.pdf
Reply With Quote
  #264  
Old 07-22-2011, 7:48 PM
MindBuilder MindBuilder is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 361
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

@mofugly13 - I think a conviction against a girlfriend's sister might not be a Lautenberg misdemeanor crime of "Domestic" violence. Not being married to the girlfriend means the girlfriend's sister isn't actually family. Maybe if he was living at the same house as the girlfriend's sister, it would be "domestic" violence.
Reply With Quote
  #265  
Old 07-23-2011, 5:17 AM
Lex Arma's Avatar
Lex Arma Lex Arma is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 346
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MindBuilder View Post
@mofugly13 - I think a conviction against a girlfriend's sister might not be a Lautenberg misdemeanor crime of "Domestic" violence. Not being married to the girlfriend means the girlfriend's sister isn't actually family. Maybe if he was living at the same house as the girlfriend's sister, it would be "domestic" violence.
Very good point! Remember CA takes your gun rights away for 10 years even after a misdemeanor conviction for simple battery on a stranger. PC 12021. Girlfriend's sister is NOT a Lautenberg victim in this country. Maybe she would be in a country that recognized common-law polygamy, but not here.
__________________
Donald Kilmer (Lex Arma) - Reason or Force.

If civic virtu does not reside in the people - no constitution, no bill of rights, no legislative body and no court will be able to preserve our liberties.

Unconsciously borrowed from: "Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women; when it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can save it." Judge Learned Hand

NONE of my posts on this website are legal advice.
I get the top bunk.
Reply With Quote
  #266  
Old 07-23-2011, 7:36 AM
shocknm's Avatar
shocknm shocknm is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: NORCAL
Posts: 384
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Stick it to 'em Don !!
More $ for the cause on it's way to the Madison Society
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cambo Bowling

When them sum bit*#@$ start droppin from the sky like in Red Dawn.... I'll be layun' right here. Poppin motherf*&%#@$. Pew.
Reply With Quote
  #267  
Old 07-23-2011, 9:37 AM
mofugly13's Avatar
mofugly13 mofugly13 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 618
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lex Arma View Post
Very good point! Remember CA takes your gun rights away for 10 years even after a misdemeanor conviction for simple battery on a stranger. PC 12021. Girlfriend's sister is NOT a Lautenberg victim in this country. Maybe she would be in a country that recognized common-law polygamy, but not here.
This sounds hopeful. I was not aware that there are degrees of DV. I'll tell him to submit a eligibility check with the DOJ. Thank's guys, a glimmer of hope is better than no hope at all.
__________________
No government deprives its citizens of rights without asserting that its actions are "reasonable" and "necessary" for high-sounding reasons such as "public safety."
A right that can be regulated is no right at all, only a temporary privilege dependent upon the good will of the very government
officials that such right is designed to constrain.
Reply With Quote
  #268  
Old 07-23-2011, 10:04 AM
VegasND's Avatar
VegasND VegasND is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Clark County
Posts: 8,640
iTrader: 21 / 100%
Default

I hope your friend is in the clear; these government injustices need to be stopped.

I've been following this thread and hope this infringement is soon to be history.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mofugly13 View Post
This sounds hopeful. I was not aware that there are degrees of DV. I'll tell him to submit a eligibility check with the DOJ. Thank's guys, a glimmer of hope is better than no hope at all.
__________________
People don't like to be meddled with. We tell them what to do, what to think, don't run, don't walk. We're in their homes and in their heads and we haven't the right. We're meddlesome.
--River Tam
Reply With Quote
  #269  
Old 07-25-2011, 6:25 AM
anthonyca anthonyca is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 5,115
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Westerner View Post
I'm also really shocked that the NRA isn't backing, or mentioning the Schrader vs Holder case. A case which is only a misdemeanor charge . A guy losing his RKBA for trying to defend himself from thugs trying to jump him. Not to mention the incident happening in the 60's
It looks like more NRA members need to call and voice their opinions on which cases they want supported.
Reply With Quote
  #270  
Old 07-25-2011, 7:22 AM
MP301's Avatar
MP301 MP301 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Now in Las Vegas NV
Posts: 4,181
iTrader: 49 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonyca View Post
It looks like more NRA members need to call and voice their opinions on which cases they want supported.
Hold the phone!

This is where the knee jerk reaction to a percieved lack of action by the NRA can screw the pooch.

All you have to do is look at the reaction by some of the less informed Calgunners when past threads came up on this subject to understand exactly why the NRA wouldnt directly or publicly touch this issue at this time.

"I dont think wife beaters need guns, etc etc." That is the kind of crap that gets spouted because many dont have a clue how easy it is for anyone to catch a Misd. DV without even having to lay a hand on anyone.

Now think about how many out of that 4 million conservative NRA members that wont take the time to think this through. Look at all the pissing and moaning when the NRA endorsed the best pro gun candidates (or the incubent if both candidates were equally gun friendly) and some happened to be Dem's! It didnt matter that the NRA did exactly what it was supposed to do and maintained the "single issue" agenda. People were cancelling memberships and slingling mud because they forgot the NRA didnt stand for National Republican Association.

So, I could see the serious damage when the antis spout off about how the evil NRA wants to give guns to the wife beaters, etc. The reality is, the NRA has to be careful due to the politics of this issue. It doesnt mean they are not indirectly supporting this or that they are not doing anything "under the Radar" (that goes both ways doesnt it?).

Either way, I DO NOT want the NRA to "publicly" support this at this time unless or until the masses understand the issue better. Yeah politics suck, but it is the game that has to be played I guess.
__________________
Any Questions about Front Sight memberships or specific information about attending, Feel Free to send me a PM!
Reply With Quote
  #271  
Old 07-25-2011, 7:38 AM
jeep7081's Avatar
jeep7081 jeep7081 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Tree House
Posts: 1,541
iTrader: 13 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonyca View Post
How could someone have a felony DV reduced to a misdemeanor and not be federally banned for life? Misdemeanor DV is a federal lifetime ban.

This case is not just about DV. It's a states rights issue also. The Feds are also arguing that the second amendment is NOT a civil right. They are saying that if you lost your 1st amendment rights, your right to vote, your right to travel etc, and then had those rights restored the lautenberg amendment would no longer apply. They are arguing that the second amendment is not a civil right.

This is an important case but many gun owners think it is only about "wife beaters" so don't read the documents.
Post #63 answers it. Sounds like you want a felony DV and not a misdemeanor? Because this way you can get it reduced after your probabtion is done to a misdemeanor and have your gun rights restored. Loophole? Wegrzyn v US 6th Cir. 2003 or 2004

http://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/spr08-35.pdf
__________________
-If you insult me for my grammar errors, what makes you think I understand the insult?
-Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. Are we done
-Voting is like falling off your bike. Sidewalk or street. Both are painful to fall on. But, the sidewalk (Mitt) is closer to the green grass.

Last edited by jeep7081; 07-25-2011 at 7:49 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #272  
Old 07-25-2011, 10:16 AM
anthonyca anthonyca is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 5,115
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MP301 View Post
Hold the phone!

This is where the knee jerk reaction to a percieved lack of action by the NRA can screw the pooch.

All you have to do is look at the reaction by some of the less informed Calgunners when past threads came up on this subject to understand exactly why the NRA wouldnt directly or publicly touch this issue at this time.

"I dont think wife beaters need guns, etc etc." That is the kind of crap that gets spouted because many dont have a clue how easy it is for anyone to catch a Misd. DV without even having to lay a hand on anyone.

Now think about how many out of that 4 million conservative NRA members that wont take the time to think this through. Look at all the pissing and moaning when the NRA endorsed the best pro gun candidates (or the incubent if both candidates were equally gun friendly) and some happened to be Dem's! It didnt matter that the NRA did exactly what it was supposed to do and maintained the "single issue" agenda. People were cancelling memberships and slingling mud because they forgot the NRA didnt stand for National Republican Association.

So, I could see the serious damage when the antis spout off about how the evil NRA wants to give guns to the wife beaters, etc. The reality is, the NRA has to be careful due to the politics of this issue. It doesnt mean they are not indirectly supporting this or that they are not doing anything "under the Radar" (that goes both ways doesnt it?).

Either way, I DO NOT want the NRA to "publicly" support this at this time unless or until the masses understand the issue better. Yeah politics suck, but it is the game that has to be played I guess.
I understand and agree with you. Things get lost in translation on forums. I want them to be involved, behind the scenes. We don't want them to stay away completely.

The more "radical" gun rights groups do a better job on this kind of thing anyway.
Reply With Quote
  #273  
Old 07-25-2011, 11:27 AM
Westerner Westerner is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 92
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MP301 View Post
Hold the phone!

This is where the knee jerk reaction to a percieved lack of action by the NRA can screw the pooch.

All you have to do is look at the reaction by some of the less informed Calgunners when past threads came up on this subject to understand exactly why the NRA wouldnt directly or publicly touch this issue at this time.

"I dont think wife beaters need guns, etc etc." That is the kind of crap that gets spouted because many dont have a clue how easy it is for anyone to catch a Misd. DV without even having to lay a hand on anyone.

Now think about how many out of that 4 million conservative NRA members that wont take the time to think this through. Look at all the pissing and moaning when the NRA endorsed the best pro gun candidates (or the incubent if both candidates were equally gun friendly) and some happened to be Dem's! It didnt matter that the NRA did exactly what it was supposed to do and maintained the "single issue" agenda. People were cancelling memberships and slingling mud because they forgot the NRA didnt stand for National Republican Association.

So, I could see the serious damage when the antis spout off about how the evil NRA wants to give guns to the wife beaters, etc. The reality is, the NRA has to be careful due to the politics of this issue. It doesnt mean they are not indirectly supporting this or that they are not doing anything "under the Radar" (that goes both ways doesnt it?).

Either way, I DO NOT want the NRA to "publicly" support this at this time unless or until the masses understand the issue better. Yeah politics suck, but it is the game that has to be played I guess.
How about the Schrader vs Holder case? No support from the NRA,and it is not a DV matter.
Reply With Quote
  #274  
Old 07-25-2011, 11:46 AM
anthonyca anthonyca is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 5,115
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Westerner View Post
How about the Schrader vs Holder case? No support from the NRA,and it is not a DV matter.
I am suprized how little attention any of these cases get.
Reply With Quote
  #275  
Old 07-27-2011, 2:29 PM
anthonyca anthonyca is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 5,115
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by M107A1 View Post
Don Kilmer submitted a request for an extension to file amended complaint yesterday.

http://www.archive.org/download/gov....15824.25.0.pdf
Was this approved?
Reply With Quote
  #276  
Old 07-27-2011, 6:03 PM
M107A1 M107A1 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 44
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonyca View Post
Was this approved?
I haven't heard anything further. I agree with one of your previous post about more waiting.... Yeah, that sucks. My question is however, what significance might having the "request for an extension to file amended complaint" being mutual agreed upon by both parties have on this case? I find that odd, but of course IANAL. Does that show that there may be a weakness on the defendants because it seems like maybe of the few things if any that they have agreed on with the plaintiffs? Can anyone elaborate on their thoughts about this?
Reply With Quote
  #277  
Old 07-27-2011, 6:42 PM
OleCuss OleCuss is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Kalifornia
Posts: 6,077
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

IANAL, but it seems to be pretty customary for opposing parties to agree to the filings which cite additional authorities. I think there are potential problems if they don't agree to reasonable requests.

Net effect is that I'd not read too much into things if all parties agree to the amending of a complaint in the normal progression of a case.
Reply With Quote
  #278  
Old 07-27-2011, 6:59 PM
M107A1 M107A1 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 44
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OleCuss View Post
IANAL, but it seems to be pretty customary for opposing parties to agree to the filings which cite additional authorities. I think there are potential problems if they don't agree to reasonable requests.

Net effect is that I'd not read too much into things if all parties agree to the amending of a complaint in the normal progression of a case.
OK, makes sense. Thanks for the insightful information!
Reply With Quote
  #279  
Old 07-27-2011, 7:21 PM
VAReact's Avatar
VAReact VAReact is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Hell, eh?
Posts: 1,512
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hoghunter7mm View Post
Or are we just chipping away?? Thanks to all that has giving me some hope and insight on this issue! I'm headed over to the Madison society and donate. Thanks Donald... You da man!!
Became a Madison Society life member just now...
__________________
NRA Life Member
SAF Life Member (Defenders' Club)
CCRKBA Life Member
Madison Society Life Member
CRPA Life Member
Reply With Quote
  #280  
Old 07-27-2011, 7:50 PM
anthonyca anthonyca is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 5,115
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VAReact View Post
Became a Madison Society life member just now...
I too became a life member because of his case. Let everyone who you think would be interested know about them. It would be great to make this thread and case go viral.

Remember what Don Kilmer said, the one plaintiff who was dismissed actually had the best 10th amendment claim. This case is much bigger than just the mistemeaner prohibition.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:24 PM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2016, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.