Victory in MSI HQL suit

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • pre64hunter

    Active Member
    Mar 19, 2010
    600
    Harford County
    En Banc means that it will be heard by all 4th circuit judges. Really there's no time frame. Probably months - maybe a year - maybe longer.

    I have stopped believing that court is anything to do with justice - it has more to do with theater and advancing their political ideals. There is no doubt in my mind that they will push this as long as they can. If they can they will wait for the SCOTUS makeup to change so they can decide how they want and not be at risk of being overturned.
    Thanks.
    Doing a little googling, 4th CC has 15 judges, as of July this year 14 with one vacancy. 8 of them appointed by Clinton, Obama and Biden, 3 by Trump, 1 by Reagan, 2 by Bush.
    I also found a list of en banc cases showing dates of the appeal and time frame for decisions. Yes, most were months maybe a year or longer.
     

    shootin the breeze

    Missed it by that much
    Dec 22, 2012
    3,876
    Highland
    Thanks.
    Doing a little googling, 4th CC has 15 judges, as of July this year 14 with one vacancy. 8 of them appointed by Clinton, Obama and Biden, 3 by Trump, 1 by Reagan, 2 by Bush.
    I also found a list of en banc cases showing dates of the appeal and time frame for decisions. Yes, most were months maybe a year or longer.
    Yes, so you already can predict the outcome of en banc hearing, hence why they requested it. Then another 5-10 years to get to SCOTUS. So 15-20 years to overturn an unconstitutional law, assuming the court is the same at that time. Yay, “justice”. Fourth box.
     

    Apd09

    Active Member
    May 30, 2013
    942
    Westminster, MD
    I really do not understand the law sometimes. SCOTUS vacated previous rulings and said apply the Bruen (Heller really test / standard) the courts do that and then the state disagrees and wants further review from En Banc.
    If the 3 judges are not capable to applying the law then why have a 3 judge panel and instead just automatically make appeals En Banc.

    Mandate was given in the GVR, it’s applied as per the GVR, where is the confusion in the ruling of the 3 judge panel?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     

    JohnnyE

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Jan 18, 2013
    9,151
    MoCo
    "common-sense" Is that their argument?
    I shall tell you what common sense is.

    Common sense is keeping a fire extinguisher under you kitchen sink even if after 60 years you've never had a fire.

    Common sense is having a smoke detector in your home, even though the only times it has ever gone off are when you're overdoing something in the oven or skillet.

    Common sense is having automobile insurance even though over perhaps a million miles of driving (a real number), you've never injured a single soul and made a sizable claim.

    Common sense is wearing your seatbelt every mile you're on the road even if, after a lifetime, it's never once been needed to keep you from hurtling through the windshield.

    Common sense is having firearms in case you're accosted, or your government needs to be kept in line, or needs a reset, even though these things have never happened during your lifetime either.
     

    Lafayette

    Not that kind of doctor
    MDS Supporter
    Jan 8, 2021
    494
    Maryland
    I shall tell you what common sense is.

    Common sense is keeping a fire extinguisher under you kitchen sink even if after 60 years you've never had a fire.

    Common sense is having a smoke detector in your home, even though the only times it has ever gone off are when you're overdoing something in the oven or skillet.

    Common sense is having automobile insurance even though over perhaps a million miles of driving (a real number), you've never injured a single soul and made a sizable claim.

    Common sense is wearing your seatbelt every mile you're on the road even if, after a lifetime, it's never once been needed to keep you from hurtling through the windshield.

    Common sense is having firearms in case you're accosted, or your government needs to be kept in line, or needs a reset, even though these things have never happened during your lifetime either.
    Beautifully said.

    Sadly as my father told me, “If common sense was all that common, more people would have it.”
     

    trickg

    Guns 'n Drums
    MDS Supporter
    Jul 22, 2008
    14,472
    Glen Burnie
    They REQUESTED an en banc hearing. Doesn’t mean they will get it. Obviously if en banc is granted it will stretch out the timeline much longer than if it’s denied.
    Does anyone here doubt that the en banc request will be granted? I don't. I see it as par for the course.
     

    Garet Jax

    Not ignored by gamer_jim
    MDS Supporter
    May 5, 2011
    6,528
    Bel Air
    Thanks.
    Doing a little googling, 4th CC has 15 judges, as of July this year 14 with one vacancy. 8 of them appointed by Clinton, Obama and Biden, 3 by Trump, 1 by Reagan, 2 by Bush.
    I also found a list of en banc cases showing dates of the appeal and time frame for decisions. Yes, most were months maybe a year or longer.

    See if you can filter by 2A cases. I think you'll find these generally have a much longer decision time frame. Again justice vs theater.
     

    Garet Jax

    Not ignored by gamer_jim
    MDS Supporter
    May 5, 2011
    6,528
    Bel Air
    They REQUESTED an en banc hearing. Doesn’t mean they will get it. Obviously if en banc is granted it will stretch out the timeline much longer than if it’s denied.

    Do you really think it won't be granted? Here's my prediction, the 4th circuit will take as long as possible to make the decision on whether or not they will grant it. They will of course accept the hearing. Then they will take as long as possible to make a decision in the case. If the SCOTUS makeup is in their favor, they will overturn the ruling. If SCOTUS isn't in their favor, then I am not sure.

    I think they will uphold it since they don't want to risk setting a national precedent.

    This has nothing to do with justice or the constitution, it is all political theater.

    EDIT - What I don't understand is why SCOTUS isn't taking the bull by the horns and forcing the decision down the State's throats. I get "this isn't what is done", but times change. In the past, courts truly evaluated their decisions and made the ones they thought were best based on the law. Today, justices have made their mind up before arguments largely based on their political leanings and they spend their time trying to justify their position. They bastardize "precedent" and interpret it to justify their decision - it is sickening.
     
    Last edited:

    swinokur

    In a State of Bliss
    Patriot Picket
    Apr 15, 2009
    55,335
    Westminster USA
    Don’t also not forget that common sense is having a spare tire in your car even though for 40 years you’ve never had a flat.
     

    pre64hunter

    Active Member
    Mar 19, 2010
    600
    Harford County
    Don’t also not forget that common sense is having a spare tire in your car even though for 40 years you’ve never had a flat.
    all very good examples but the have it "just in case" doesn't preclude the other measures of preventing tragedy like having a gun or other means of protection to prevent something from happening.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,185
    Messages
    7,226,363
    Members
    33,175
    Latest member
    Tyler42232

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom