Looks like we're going to court boys (and girls)..

[Glock_Fireman]

but the key part is Not Without a Fight

 

[Right2Carry]

I would not be at all surprised if the spineless fool did it that way to keep from getting his hands dirty. Bet Martie's buddies will love that. It will hang around their necks, not his.

Yup, he got all those Democratic Representatives to follow him, vote for his law, and he is leaving them out to dry.

I can see his comment now, I didn't sign the bill, because it had some very questionable issues.

 

[Glock_Fireman]

Yup, he got all those Democratic Representatives to follow him, vote for his law, and he is leaving them out to dry.

I can see his comment now, I didn't sign the bill, because it had some very questionable issues.

Right

 

[Dave MP]

I call BS. He's waiting for Obama to schedule the signing ceremony.

Coordinating for the children to be bused in?

 

[Brooklyn]

Impeachment.

That's up to congress. And this adminstration really does not what to go there.

 

[Brooklyn]

I do not know bro, I am just barely smart enough on PR to know this is critical. I am much too blunt, opinionated and vocal to be any good at it.

It is up to people with subject matter expertise in this arena to format our message into something that is acceptable by the right and left. Once that occurs, it is my responsibility to propogate that message and be part of the folks who present a coherent and unified pro-2A front.

The thing that really peezes me off is NRA Wayne toting a platform of 70% of crime is comitted by repeat offenders and in the same breath is against anything background and straw purchase. This is freaking contradictory. The message should be 70% repeat, we are for all background legislation that does not create unacceptable waits and does not lead to a national gun registry. We are for all straw purchase legislation that does not violate legal family and friend sharing.

just my 02

This missed his point. Repeat offenders should be in jail.

Thus they can not straw purchase or just steal guns

Straw purchase is red herring. It is part of the incrimentalism. Before I looked at the real numbers I favored background chks to.

They are irrelevant and if we let the left claim otherwise you get fingerprinting and even warrentless inspections..


Now he is a decisive figure good, its all a show anyway good cop bad cop etc.

Repeat offenders belong in jail. That's it.

 

[Brooklyn]

Its not about criminals obeying law or whether it works, its 100% about conceding something that does not impact law abiding citizens to appeaze the left.

Appease the left? Why?

First it can't be done. They fear free men more than criminals. Much more. They are Marxists period. Ignore this at your peril.

Second why? Expose the big lie before its too late. Ignore this also at your peril.

Sail off in the direction of appeasement and I can never follow.

 

[gmhowell]

Coordinating for the children to be bused in?

Can't he just send the plane up again to fetch them?

That's up to congress. And this adminstration really does not what to go there.

But Alex Jones said that the Congress is in on it too!!

I thought about pointing this out to OP, but I'm doubting that it would get through.

 

[Maxsplat]

I'm trying to get some understanding on the effectiveness of the referendum and proposed court cases. I understand the end goal of Referendum is to have the law basically voided. The start of the referendum process can delay the law from taking affect(if ever) by what? 1 year? 18 months?

From what I've gotten here is that taking the law to court can only be done after the law takes effect. I take that to mean as of 10-1-2013 we would still need to meet the requirements of the warden until the corts rule on the case.

Is that correct? A friend of mine is under the impression that the court case will in fact delay the law taking effect by at least 1 year and we would not be required to jump through the new circus hoops. I disagree with that but he swears up and donw this is how it works.

 

[Forthefunofit]

Maybe

I'm trying to get some understanding on the effectiveness of the referendum and proposed court cases. I understand the end goal of Referendum is to have the law basically voided. The start of the referendum process can delay the law from taking affect(if ever) by what? 1 year? 18 months?

From what I've gotten here is that taking the law to court can only be done after the law takes effect. I take that to mean as of 10-1-2013 we would still need to meet the requirements of the warden until the corts rule on the case.

Is that correct? A friend of mine is under the impression that the court case will in fact delay the law taking effect by at least 1 year and we would not be required to jump through the new circus hoops. I disagree with that but he swears up and donw this is how it works.

Much like the concealed carry issue, the court may stay the implementation of the new rule pending the review by a appelate authority is what I think he is referencing.

 

[Brooklyn]

I'm trying to get some understanding on the effectiveness of the referendum and proposed court cases. I understand the end goal of Referendum is to have the law basically voided. The start of the referendum process can delay the law from taking affect(if ever) by what? 1 year? 18 months?

From what I've gotten here is that taking the law to court can only be done after the law takes effect. I take that to mean as of 10-1-2013 we would still need to meet the requirements of the warden until the corts rule on the case.

Is that correct? A friend of mine is under the impression that the court case will in fact delay the law taking effect by at least 1 year and we would not be required to jump through the new circus hoops. I disagree with that but he swears up and donw this is how it works.

Due to the nature of the claim ( infrigment of a fundamental right ) it is easy to show irreparable harm from enforcement.
In addition as it is a new law it is hard to argue any injury to state interests by injoining enforcement until after the court has ruled.

I really would be unprecedented if no injunction were granted.

http://www.munsch.com/files/a_primer_....pdf

IANAL but I have google ....

There are no guarantees however....

 

[Sharpeneddark]

Ok, the bill is signed. Anyone see any lawsuits filed by the NRA?

 

[teratos]

Ok, the bill is signed. Anyone see any lawsuits filed by the NRA?

I guess that means they aren't going to file any.....they can't fool you.

 

[fabsroman]

I guess that means they aren't going to file any.....they can't fool you.

They are probably waiting until the referendum petition period expires. One cutoff is at the end of this month for the 57,000 needed signatures. After that, they have another cutoff at the end of next month. If the issue gets put on the ballot for 2014, filing the lawsuit right now would be a waste of time. Plenty of time to file it on July 3rd and still have the Court decide on an injunction prior to October 1, 2013 getting here.

 

[commiezapr]

Martin O'Malley has officially turned me into a gun nut...

Until all this, I had never

Been to a political demonstration
Thought about becoming a MD Designated collector (it's in the mail)
Thought about ever wanting an AK or AR (waiting now on DC to go through)
Wanted to join the NRA (I am now a Brand new Life Member )

Thank you Glorious Leader, you have awakened my inner patriot

Of course you know

This is EXACTLY how I feel. Believe or not I am a non-Republican pro-2A person. I have always been interested in guns and was lucky enough to inherit two handguns from my father. In past years, I've put off getting more guns, until now. MOM and Obama, the two best gun salesmen in Maryland

 

[TxAggie]

Martin O'Malley has officially turned me into a gun nut...

Until all this, I had never

Been to a political demonstration
Thought about becoming a MD Designated collector (it's in the mail)
Thought about ever wanting an AK or AR (waiting now on DC to go through)
Wanted to join the NRA (I am now a Brand new Life Member )

Thank you Glorious Leader, you have awakened my inner patriot

Of course you know

^ This

I grew up in Texas, and yes I was the stereotypical guy: boots, hat, cattle, and a rifle in the rear window of our truck (no Copenhagen though). It was so ingrained into my culture that when I settled here after the Army, I didn't have a gun but only because I took it for granted that I could simply go down and get one anytime I wanted. So from 1997 until last year I had ZERO firearms in the house, and after carrying M-16's in the Army I didn't have a huge desire for an AR.

Then I got hit up by salesmen of the year Obama and O'Malley. So before the crisis in December, I went from 0 in the house to 3, and I recently set up a reloading bench in the house. I want more, but my current funds don't allow it, so I'll make due with what I have. I think chances of this law being overturned as being very slim, but I'll do what I can to get it overturned and get new legislators in office, and bide my time until I can return to a pro gun state.

 

[swinokur]

Can the lawsuit actually be filed prior to Oct 1? I thought you had to prove the harm the law causes. No law, no harm. Is this incorrect?

Where is Esq Appellate these days anyway?

 

[Brooklyn]

Can the lawsuit actually be filed prior to Oct 1? I thought you had to prove the harm the law causes. No law, no harm. Is this incorrect?

Where is Esq Appellate these days anyway?

Once it is law you can file as far as I know. Ianal

Esq just might be busy