Do we have confirmation of this? The pdf up on MSI is still the original.Yep, from my basic read of SB1, seems that nearly all of it has been deemed unconstitutional by 3 judges in NJ. The only thing left is 21 year old purchase.
Do we have confirmation of this? The pdf up on MSI is still the original.Yep, from my basic read of SB1, seems that nearly all of it has been deemed unconstitutional by 3 judges in NJ. The only thing left is 21 year old purchase.
It will remain the original bill until the hearing and then a committee voting session where the first chance at amendments are provided (unless the sponsor(s) offer amendments at the hearing).Do we have confirmation of this? The pdf up on MSI is still the original.
He's not saying SB1 itself has been deemed unconstitutional. Hasn't even passed yet. He's saying all portions of it which other states have tried have been shot down thus farDo we have confirmation of this? The pdf up on MSI is still the original.
Thanks for clarificationIt will remain the original bill until the hearing and then a committee voting session where the first chance at amendments are provided (unless the sponsor(s) offer amendments at the hearing).
George Washington fought a war to establish a new government that includes three evenly balanced branches that we just saw prevail - using stern words! - in court, in Bruen. I’m glad Washington didn’t stop until that goal was achieved - and now we have that tool to use. Which we’re watching happen right on 2A matters before our eyes.Imagine if George Washington Stopped after he wrote a sternly worded letter and imagine if he asked to speak in court to get his point across and change their mind.
Not really going to apply. Otherwise things like “murder is wrong” wouldn’t apply in churches or their grounds either. Unless you attend the church of the gun and the prophet John Moses Browning had preached you must carry a firearm to properly worship. Then you might have an argument in court. Otherwise the government is not infringing on your right to free exercise of religion.I have not read all 350 posts so I don't know if it has not already been brought up but doesn't SB-1 violate the constitution on the separation of Church and State when a state Bill or law says I cannot carry in a Synagogue, Church or Mosque. If a Rabbi says I can carry within the confines of the Synagogue and its properties, the government cannot have any say in that. Or, am I thinking wrong? I was thinking about that when the piece of chit Waldwhatever walked past the Patriot Picket on Monday.
And, if all goes as normal, the sponsor will simply get up and say "here's my bill, we are completely changing it, but the documentation is not ready at this time" and the committee will hear testimony on a bill that looks nothing like the one they know they are going to vote upon...It will remain the original bill until the hearing and then a committee voting session where the first chance at amendments are provided (unless the sponsor(s) offer amendments at the hearing).
Churches are beyond the purview of the government because they are not one of the five sensitive places so banning carry is unconstitutional, unless the government can find a suitable historical analog.Not really going to apply. Otherwise things like “murder is wrong” wouldn’t apply in churches or their grounds either. Unless you attend the church of the gun and the prophet John Moses Browning had preached you must carry a firearm to properly worship. Then you might have an argument in court. Otherwise the government is not infringing on your right to free exercise of religion.
It’s wrong for government to ban it for other reasons though.
I wasn’t claiming they could ban carry there. But it isn’t because of any separation or church and state or free exercise of religion reasons. Because 2A and no historical analogs.Churches are beyond the purview of the government because they are not one of the five sensitive places so banning carry is unconstitutional, unless the government can find a suitable historical analog.
I dunno. Bruen seemed pretty effective
^^^^^ THIS ^^^^^Pass the damn thing. Lets get it on.
We adopted the yellow star symbol in this SB1 fight with reverent respect, because we are all endangered, but one group of innocents is clearly endangered now, and will be, more so, if this passes as is.
H/T our own MigraineMan for taking our story national.
ICYMI:
The Next Logical Step: Maryland Bills Would Designate Much of the State a No-Go Zone for Gun Owners - The Truth About Guns
◀Previous Post Next Post▶ Reader MigraineMan writes . . . Maryland’s 2023 Legislative Session jumped right into full gun control mode with Senator Jeff Waldstreicher collaborating with soon-to-be Secretary of State (nee Senator) Susan Lee on the unconstitutional Senate Bill 001 (read the...www.thetruthaboutguns.com
View attachment 400071
New signFrom the West Coast version of
Maryland, only three days ago.
Exhibit A:
VIDEO: Authorities search for suspect who shot inside synagogue; Rabbi calls it a 'terrorist attack'
"He came to terrorize people": Surveillance video shows the suspect entering through the front door. When he is invited in, he then rack his gun and fire off several rounds.abc7news.com
View attachment 400125 View attachment 400126 View attachment 400127 View attachment 400128
Evidently fired blank rounds.
Yet, what WaldstriKKKer intends, whether blanks or real, it will be like shooting fish in a barrel.
With the current SCOTUS, it doesn't seem like it will take that long.I'm not sure I understand the logic of passing it so we can fight it for 8 to 9 years.
We should be able to get a TRO and PI pretty quickly, given what's happened in NJ and what's likely to happen when 2CA is forced to uphold the district court decision in Antonyuk under the threat of SCOTUS beatdown made in Alito's statement when SCOTUS didn't remove 2CA's stay on procedural grounds.I'm not sure I understand the logic of passing it so we can fight it for 8 to 9 years.