Tuesday @ 11:00 a.m. Emergency Hearing

[BRONZ]

Did you guys expect anything different.

All the court cases around the country where laws have been overturned nothing has changed.

To buy a gun in DC is like winning the lottery.
We had a better chance with the referendum and we came up 700 votes short. I blame many here.

 

[Robert]

yes there is going to be a complete press. far from over.

your desire for communication is appropriate and your views on the same are spot on and heard. gimme some time and I will put something up tomorrow. right now I need to put kids to bed. sorry. but I want time to get it right. plus I a still typing on hateful phone thing.

hope that is acceptable.

Patrick it is indeed! Family first.

Perhaps I am not understanding what it is people want to hear. When you are in the midst of a lawsuit it is common practice that council advises participants to STFU. There is no discussion of strategy beyond "we are suing for...." At this point Patrick is the only person privy to that information. The board of MSI is not aware of what is going on. The only thing MSI leadership (with the exception of Patrick) knows is what is in published documents. Those who know more are asked not to talk about it.....

No matter who wins, this is going to go to the 4th circuit. I would expect it to go to SCOTUS (whether they will hear it or not is another story.

I get that there is much that can't be discused as a tactical position, and I'm not looking for that, that's why I used the words Big Picture.

But I read through what I call 'posts of despair (POD's)', and I've gotta say a lot of it seems to originate because we don't have a big picture game plan.

IMHO In order to get people to follow a path, you've got to give them a map that they can and want to follow. I don't think it needs to be detailed, but maybe a win/loss action flow chart. There is comfort in knowing that there are some battles that are preliminary and just stepping stones, while others are not.

Anyway, that's all I've got I hope you and other can understand my concerns.

 

[Jaybeez]

district court file for injunction and tro
district court we will, they appeal
district court they win, we appeal
either way it will go to circuit court

circuit court may be a repeat of district court
unless bigger fish plead the parties in md to not appeal to scotus

like ny and California see md losing, and ask md not to appeal so they can keep their schemes temporarily

or another democrat takes the white house and appoints more supreme court judges, and big fish like the nra and saf beg msi not to continue the suit to scotus for fear of a reversal of Heller and worse.

thats the game plan.
its always been the plan.
same as in woollard
heller
mc donald
and several other major suits discussed in long threads around these parts

even if we lose and stop at the circuit court level it can be a win of sorts. having yet another circuit court decision that differs from other decisions increases the likelyhood of scotus even taking a future case with a better chance of winning.

 

[Robert]

Originally Posted by Robert
Indeed, as I've said this is going to be very expensive and so is the election. Is there enough for both I wonder..?

Sure there is, if people (again, no one in particular) places the fight for their rights above what they feel the NEED to buy next. Put half the cost of a gun in over the next few months.

Yes, but that doesn't mean the 2A groups are going to press on, and in what manor or did I miss something?

Today was a procedural step. Not a loss, and nothing more than a checkbox. All are in this until they're not.

And who are you referring to as the 'We' in this picture? As a supporter, I expect leadership, direction and solid communications to be disseminated to those I give my hard earned money too.

WE are the gun rights COMMUNITY... Patience, as this will be a marathon, not a sprint.

I don't know about everyone else but I don't have time nor the desire to learn case law and the details within. For the same reason I don't diagnose medical issues, I hire a doctor to help guide me through it., I pay lawyers to deal with any leagle issues.

No one is asking you to, and if I (or anyone else) sounded that way, I apologize for all of us. But, knowing the framework in which these things occur is, IMO, most important.

Is a big picture game plan really that hard to communicate? I guess I could be way off, but seems possible and VERY beneficial.. But then again I could just be looking for someone to hold my hand through it.

There is onlyu so much trhat can be said, and a lot of that has to be filtered and checked before letting it out. Frustrating, I know...but that's just how it goes. And, FTR, I am NOT holding ANYONE'S hand!!!!

Hope this helps.

It does, but I'm looking for more of a big picture game plan, not a AAR.

 

[Robert]

district court file for injunction and tro
district court we will, they appeal
district court they win, we appeal
either way it will go to circuit court

circuit court may be a repeat of district court
unless bigger fish plead the parties in md to not appeal to scotus

like ny and California see md losing, and ask md not to appeal so they can keep their schemes temporarily

or another democrat takes the white house and appoints more supreme court judges, and big fish like the nra and saf beg msi not to continue the suit to scotus for fear of a reversal of Heller and worse.

thats the game plan.
its always been the plan.
same as in woollard
heller
mc donald
and several other major suits discussed in long threads around these parts

Are the 2A parties involved committed to each step?

EDIT:
I guess that question is moot until we hopefully see a plan directly from the people involved in taking it to the courts .

 

[L0gic]

district court file for injunction and tro
district court we will, they appeal
district court they win, we appeal
either way it will go to circuit court

circuit court may be a repeat of district court
unless bigger fish plead the parties in md to not appeal to scotus

like ny and California see md losing, and ask md not to appeal so they can keep their schemes temporarily

or another democrat takes the white house and appoints more supreme court judges, and big fish like the nra and saf beg msi not to continue the suit to scotus for fear of a reversal of Heller and worse.

thats the game plan.
its always been the plan.
same as in woollard
heller
mc donald
and several other major suits discussed in long threads around these parts

Ya know, I was planning to sleep tonight. Thanks for that...

 

[Jaybeez]

Are the 2A parties involved committed to each step?

EDIT:
I guess that question is moot until we hopefully see a plan directly from the people involved in taking it to the courts .

absolutely. of that i have no doubt.

I dont think you will see them say that publicly. But take solice in knowing that is how these things work. when we get to the circuit court level we will having backing from many national groups, through funding, advisement and friend of the court briefs.

 

[ObsceneJesster]

Court cases give you precedent for the future. Laws can always be changed....

Hopefully we win.

That's why we need to get these idiots out and keep them out. That way we don't have to worry about ta ruling made by a judge who was appointed by a Democrat. Even if we win this case, eventually the people who run this state will get their way in court whether it's with SB281 or some other anti second bill. We just can't keep relying on our court system and hope they see things our way.

I guess this is all just wishful thinking in MD but we at least have to try and get some decent people representing us.

Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk 4

 

[vector03]

Did you guys expect anything different.

All the court cases around the country where laws have been overturned nothing has changed.

To buy a gun in DC is like winning the lottery.
We had a better chance with the referendum and we came up 700 votes short. I blame many here.

This is the second or third time I've read this today. Why in gods name would you want the people of Maryland making ANY decisions involving your inabilable rights? The question would have been framed by our opposition.


If you want treat YOUR rights like poker chips, go for it....please leave the rest of us out of it.

 

[fowlwhacker]

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/politics/bs-md-gun-lawsuit-ruling-20131001,0,3146927.story

article says "In denying a temporary restraining order, U.S. District Court Judge Catherine Blake said the plaintiffs undercut their argument by waiting to challenge the law until a few days before it took effect."

So was the we waited too long argument used? Or is the Sun full of it again?

Not being a lawyer, I wonder if the judge really had legal merit on her opinion and rationale that the request was not timely and happened only days before sb281 went into effect. Was this her personal opinion and discretion or was it based upon the law. Why do we have laws if judges are able to use their personal discretion. If the state doesn't have a way to issue new guns after 10/1 how can they actually stand behind sb281 legally?

 

[Jaybeez]

Not being a lawyer, I wonder if the judge really had legal merit on her opinion and rationale that the request was not timely and happened only days before sb281 went into effect. Was this her personal opinion and discretion or was it based upon the law. Why do we have laws if judges are able to use their personal discretion. If the state doesn't have a way to issue new guns after 10/1 how can they actually stand behind sb281 legally?

being the baltimore sun, and knowing whom they support, they could have looked or listened to hours of testimony, and picked out ine senence that mimicked Gansler's argument. the sun, above all else, tows the party line.

 

[fightinbluhen51]

I don't think all the doom and gloom is good, I think everybody needs to dig in and get ready for a good long fight. If you lose a round and put your head down then that's sad. Pick your head up and do what you got tO do to win the overall fight.

Revolutionary war lasted 8 long years; civil war, 4. Heller was a full 4 years and McDonald 2.

Long battles are what Americans are known for when it comes to fighting for liberty.

 

[Brooklyn]

Not surprising, an order like this is a very high hurdle.
Looking back it may not have been a great idea to ask for it.
This is a fight that will go to SCOTUS, dig in, send money.

NO NO NO. Its pro forma. If you do not ask you are barred from raising it later. Moreover -- one important goal is to get the state to commit, in briefs, to their arguments, which will be very similar to later arguments which gives our side time to dig in and develop counter arguments ..


This is the game.. This is how its played ...

IANAL this is JMHO ...

 

[JD-IAFF]

My concern is for the caliber of legal counsel we have working on this. I could be WAY off, but some of the comments made from people that were present have me very concerned.

Sweeney is a product liability / toxic tort attorney. He's VERY good within the scope of his area of expertise, but this suit is a bit outside that area.

Ok, it's a LOT outside that area. I'd be curious to know how he was selected. There had to have been more appropriate options available, especially at the rates that Bradley Arant would be charging. Hopefully it's at least being handled pro bono.

 

[rnfeliciano]

its hard to have patience when I just got caught up in the federal shutdown. I now have no money available to help in these causes.

 

[JailHouseLiar]

Funny, because when it was first filed everybody said it sounded great and it was going to be a home run. As soon as it fails everybody starts mother****ing it.

I thought it was poorly done, but kept that opinion to myself so as not to be the wet blanket and dampen morale. I thought the HQL was much better, but in light of the fact there were months to draft both, unimpressed.

But I'm not a lawyer so what do I know.

 

[JD-IAFF]

I'd like to read those cases if you have party name, citations or links.

Flemming v. Nestor, 363 U.S. 603 (1960)

Nestor argued that the payment of Social Security taxes created an implied contract between himself and government with respect to the payment of future benefits. In other words, Nestor believed that he had a property interest in the money that he had paid in.

SCOTUS determined that no such contract exists, and there is no contractual right to receive SS benefit payments. No property interest exists, and as such the takings clause does not have import with respect to denied SS benefit payments. The only protection afforded to participants is due process rights.

The short version of that is that Congress could pass legislation terminating the program tomorrow, and you wouldn't have a legal basis for asserting that you were owed a dime.

You can read the actual ruling here

 

[HotWheelsUMD]

Did you guys expect anything different.

All the court cases around the country where laws have been overturned nothing has changed.

To buy a gun in DC is like winning the lottery.
We had a better chance with the referendum and we came up 700 votes short. I blame many here.

when was this voted on? when exactly was it "700 votes short"?

 

[Brooklyn]

district court file for injunction and tro
district court we will, they appeal
district court they win, we appeal
either way it will go to circuit court

circuit court may be a repeat of district court
unless bigger fish plead the parties in md to not appeal to scotus

like ny and California see md losing, and ask md not to appeal so they can keep their schemes temporarily

or another democrat takes the white house and appoints more supreme court judges, and big fish like the nra and saf beg msi not to continue the suit to scotus for fear of a reversal of Heller and worse.

thats the game plan.
its always been the plan.
same as in woollard
heller
mc donald
and several other major suits discussed in long threads around these parts

even if we lose and stop at the circuit court level it can be a win of sorts. having yet another circuit court decision that differs from other decisions increases the likelihood of scotus even taking a future case with a better chance of winning.

Say what ??

Yes they will duck rather than appeal, but not appealing is a full loss and will decrease the chance of the court reversing a decision that the state failed to appeal.. Fail to appeal leads to res judicta as I understand it.


So another state may try and get a case to scotus and scotuis has all it needs to deny cert unless there is a direct conflict and given the states failure to appeal in the first place the only way they would grant cert is if it was in conflict -- that is another loss for gun rights which they would never appeal because its a win for them.


we win we don't appeal. We lose we appeal.
They lose if we win, so if they don't appeal, then the next case must be a loss for our side or a loss for theirs---
If they loose, we win, so no conflict and no split, but if they win we appeal and use the split--- they would never appeal a win and neither will we.

Worse case we need to make them lose in more than one circuit, this gets easier with each case..


I just don't see the strategy you are setting up for them.

It is true that they will duck appeal as they did in IL. But as long as there are cases bubbling up it not a wining hand.

Perhaps I misunderstand you.

 

[Pstango]

Just caught up on the last 2 hours' posts, and I have to say I'm thoroughly disappointed.

Not in the decision--TROs were not a sure thing, and I certainly didn't expect it to happen.

I'm disappointed in a large number of people in this community.

People who don't understand the process, but refuse to listen to those who do.
People who insist that if it doesn't go how they want, it's an abject failure.
People who have a knee-jerk, "But I WANT" reaction.
People who are dead set that there is always collusion in the Court.
People who have to demand everything be answered at once.
People who refuse to believe that there are additional steps ahead.
People who can't grasp the concept of a long-term, methodical approach.
People who can't see a positive in anything that isn't instant-gratification.

No... I've changed my mind...

I'm not disappointed.

I'm sickened. Disgusted. Embarrassed.

agreed... Patience folks.