Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

CGF Lawsuit: OOIDA v. Lindley - AB-962 Unconstitutional

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • #16
    stag1500
    Senior Member
    • Apr 2006
    • 669

    Originally posted by hoffmang
    As the last sentence in the release says, we'll be going for an injunction before the law takes effect.

    -Gene
    Oops. Missed that the first time.
    Achievement of your happiness is the only moral purpose of your life, and that happiness, not pain or mindless self-indulgence, is the proof of your moral integrity, since it is the proof and the result of your loyalty to the achievement of your values. -Ayn Rand

    Comment

    • #17
      Window_Seat
      Veteran Member
      • Apr 2008
      • 3533

      Thanks to Jason Davis, Calguns Foundation & Gene for all their efforts.

      I'll be adding this complaint to my signature line shortly now.

      Erik.

      Comment

      • #18
        choprzrul
        Calguns Addict
        • Oct 2009
        • 6535

        1. August
        2. September
        3. October
        4. November
        5. December
        6. January

        Now the end of July and it takes effect in Feb. Is there a significance to waiting for almost exactly 6 months before to file the suit? I've been wondering why something wasn't filed sooner. Timing? Right plaintiff? Full moon?

        Just curious.

        Comment

        • #19
          wash
          Calguns Addict
          • Aug 2007
          • 9011

          It's my understanding that a plaintiff backed out which delayed the case.

          But it's on now.
          sigpic
          Originally posted by oaklander
          Dear Kevin,

          You suck!!! Your are wrong!!! Stop it!!!
          Proud CGF and CGN donor. SAF life member. Former CRPA member. Gpal beta tester (it didn't work). NRA member.

          Comment

          • #20
            boxbro
            Senior Member
            • Apr 2009
            • 790

            Originally posted by bwiese
            Apologies for the crude reference, but this is gonna be a 3-way gangbang.
            "Look at the tyranny of party -- at what is called party allegiance, party loyalty -- a snare invented by designing men for selfish purposes -- and which turns voters into chattles, slaves, rabbits, and all the while their masters, and they themselves are shouting rubbish about liberty, independence, freedom of opinion, freedom of speech, honestly unconscious of the fantastic contradiction....."

            "The Character of Man," Mark Twain's Autobiography

            Comment

            • #21
              Muzz
              Member
              • Jan 2004
              • 202

              May we kill this thing any way we can. Except with old age.

              Comment

              • #22
                kf6tac
                Senior Member
                • Aug 2009
                • 1779

                Originally posted by bwiese
                Apologies for the crude reference, but this is gonna be a 3-way gangbang.
                Exactly my thoughts when I saw the thread title.

                Put another way, this is one horse I'll be happy to beat to death.


                Statements I make on this forum should not be construed as giving legal advice or forming an attorney-client relationship.

                Comment

                • #23
                  Gray Peterson
                  Calguns Addict
                  • Jan 2005
                  • 5817

                  Probably right plaintiffs. Remember that Jason Davis is the lawyer for all of the plaintiffs except for Chuck Michel who is representing the NRA. It takes a special kind of gumption, "fire in the belly", if you will, to be a good plaintiff for something you believe in.

                  Comment

                  • #24
                    CMonfort
                    Member
                    • Dec 2009
                    • 464

                    There were multiple, significant reasons why this suit and Parker were filed when they were. Those reasons will become evident eventually.

                    Originally posted by choprzrul
                    1. August
                    2. September
                    3. October
                    4. November
                    5. December
                    6. January

                    Now the end of July and it takes effect in Feb. Is there a significance to waiting for almost exactly 6 months before to file the suit? I've been wondering why something wasn't filed sooner. Timing? Right plaintiff? Full moon?

                    Just curious.
                    sigpic
                    CMonfort@michellawyers.com
                    www.michellawyers.com
                    www.calgunlaws.com
                    Subscribe to Receive News Bulletins

                    Comment

                    • #25
                      Hopi
                      Calguns Addict
                      • Oct 2005
                      • 7700

                      Never cease to amaze.

                      Comment

                      • #26
                        choprzrul
                        Calguns Addict
                        • Oct 2009
                        • 6535

                        Originally posted by CMonfort
                        There were multiple, significant reasons why this suit and Parker were filed when they were. Those reasons will become evident eventually.
                        Figured as much, but had to ask

                        .

                        Comment

                        • #27
                          CalNRA
                          Calguns Addict
                          • Apr 2006
                          • 8686

                          Originally posted by bwiese
                          Apologies for the crude reference, but this is gonna be a 3-way gangbang.
                          we on Calguns are pretty desensitized to...such references.
                          Originally posted by cvigue
                          This is not rocket surgery.

                          Comment

                          • #28
                            Window_Seat
                            Veteran Member
                            • Apr 2008
                            • 3533

                            Can this case be added to the CGF Wiki?

                            Erik.

                            Comment

                            • #29
                              Table Rock Arms
                              Senior Member
                              • Jan 2009
                              • 812

                              I am glad they are addressing the fact that nobody has any idea what a handgun ammunition vendor is. Hard to imagine they could put the law into effect with no definition.

                              Comment

                              • #30
                                Window_Seat
                                Veteran Member
                                • Apr 2008
                                • 3533

                                Originally posted by Gray Peterson
                                Probably right plaintiffs. Remember that Jason Davis is the lawyer for all of the plaintiffs except for Chuck Michel who is representing the NRA. It takes a special kind of gumption, "fire in the belly", if you will, to be a good plaintiff for something you believe in.
                                You got that right!

                                Erik.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                UA-8071174-1