ShiNNinG
Active Member
Just joined SAF and MSI.
We may have our disagreement in tactics at times, but I have for the last two years supported MSI with finances (and I really should support with more time in the future), so that said, I really do appreciate all of the hard work.A lot of questions, and I've been away all day...same with Norton.
MSI knew about this a while back, and while all the armchair quarterbacks were bitching that we weren't "doing enough" or we were being "too polite" we were grinding our teeth trying to remain mute while getting all of our ducks in a row. Norton did a lot of background research for this case and got a lot of the names, dates and info that will be needed to make this a success.
And yes, we are helping to foot the bill. We've been holding off on purchasing a lot of things that people thought we should buy, and holding back on things that people thought we should do. We (MSI) will be cutting a major check to support this. This is our mission, and we've been laying groundwork in ways that weren't appropriate for public discussion.
So to the impatient paeople that have been pissing and moaning about the lack of action, you can go **** yourselves. Thanks for making our jobs ten times harder while we put things together for this.
There's others that will be influential in this as well, but I'll let them announce their involvement whenever they feel the time is right.
But this is no slam dunk, and don't think for a second that win or lose, our enemies in the legislature won't try to pay us back tenfold.
As to the money thing, I don'tt hink it matters where you send money to now....just send it. This case is priority one for MSI as it's the flagship mission. Fighting other bad legislation, as important as it is to do so is always second on the mission statement and we're a few months away from MD's legislative session.
All I'm saying is that there has to be a better way to handle the questions about the work you are doing behind the scenes.
That is a good way to stop me and other good people from donating.The folks that continually pepper MSI with questions and then getting upset when they can't get an answer, and then throw sand in the gears because they think their donation entitles them to battle plans. You have to assume that members of the MSP and other anti-gun groups join up pro-gun groups and do intel work. It's because of this that you have to play things close to the chest.
Again, sorry to be a stick in the mud but lets say that MD loses today and they must issue to law abiding citizens, they will take 2 years to issuse a permit and then someone will file a lawsuit and it will be again years before that is settled.
While I appreciate the sentiment and have donated tp the SAF, I will not be holding my breath that we will soon be carrying in MD.
Thanks for fighting but I know what we are up against and it is not good.
NOBODY
That is a good way to stop me and other good people from donating.
you guys are missing the point, except for Spot I'm sure.
If you are a representative of a non-profit .org that I donate my hard earned money to....If I ask questions about the good fight, please don't respond to me with "Go F%$# Yourself"
Is everyone clear on this now? I understand the reasoning for keeping some stuff under wraps. I believe that the GFU response was very unprofessional for a representative of MSI.
That is a good way to stop me and other good people from donating.
Again, sorry to be a stick in the mud but lets say that MD loses today and they must issue to law abiding citizens, they will take 2 years to issuse a permit and then someone will file a lawsuit and it will be again years before that is settled.
Don't forget the 4~6 month lead time on permit processing.Deadlines will be set for initial briefs, then response to those briefs. Then MD will file a request for an extension, which SAF will oppose with a request for a Motion for Summary Judgment. The state's request will be granted, the SAF request denied.
Then the state will file another brief and SAF will respond. At which point the court will call a hearing, where both sides will acknowledge no "finding" is required. SAF will again ask for an MSJ and MD will again request a delay. The MD motion will be denied but the court will allow MD time to formulate more arguments before actually ruling. Barring something interesting from MD, the court will issue their judgment.
This is pretty much how every single other case has gone.
If MD loses, they will request a stay on the MSJ while they appeal based on the inherent danger of letting people roam the streets with guns. The court may agree if MD paints a case that says they might win on appeal. But given this is a civil rights case, chances are the answer will be "tough".
Timeline front to back: 9 months although we could see things move much faster. I might owe Krucam dinner this year, yet.
That is one bet I'd be happy to lose.
The big likelihood for slowing the process down will be one of the other cases making it up the chain of the 4th or to the Supreme Court before the judgment is made. Then this court will go into hiatus waiting on the Supreme/Circuit Court to decide, just like so many cases that waited on McDonald. So if the NC case advances, or if Sykes in CA moves beyond the 9th...everything will probably stop. Not sure the NY case can advance fast enough to get in the way.
you guys are missing the point, except for Spot I'm sure.
If you are a representative of a non-profit .org that I donate my hard earned money to....If I ask questions about the good fight, please don't respond to me with "Go F%$# Yourself"
Is everyone clear on this now? I understand the reasoning for keeping some stuff under wraps. I believe that the GFU response was very unprofessional for a representative of MSI.
So to the impatient paeople that have been pissing and moaning about the lack of action, you can go **** yourselves. Thanks for making our jobs ten times harder while we put things together for this.
Doubtful. Once ruled upon, as someone else said, they will have to comply. Making a 2 year waiting period, and getting hauled right back in front of the court a motion for summary judgment will be issued almost immediately. Considering there is a permitting process in place, and even if that process takes 3 or 4 months, you could not arbitrarily increase it to your "2" year example and not draw the suspicion of the court for circumventing their ruling.Again, sorry to be a stick in the mud but lets say that MD loses today and they must issue to law abiding citizens, they will take 2 years to issuse a permit and then someone will file a lawsuit and it will be again years before that is settled.
While I appreciate the sentiment and have donated tp the SAF, I will not be holding my breath that we will soon be carrying in MD.
Thanks for fighting but I know what we are up against and it is not good.
NOBODY
Nah, Spot was talking about people (like myself) that have said we should stick it to the hypocrites in the legislature who have a permit and then vote against us.I do not believe they were talking to you in the first place. They were talking to the people who got an answer of "We can't say yet" and then throw their donation in their face thinking they are entitled to the full 'roadmap''". Perhaps spot can further explain to what level did people take it to cause him to use such language.
-Gray