I'm wondering if the plaintiffs ought to rush to apply, so that they can get denied before they have to file a new case?
Are they even accepting applications yet?
I'm wondering if the plaintiffs ought to rush to apply, so that they can get denied before they have to file a new case?
Are they even accepting applications yet?
The more I think about it, I am puzzled? Emergency legislation? Then followed by permanent legislation?
Maybe its the tinfoil, but is this a bait and switch? Test?
Why would they do this (pass legislation) twice? Why would the judge even consider non-final "Emergency Legislation"?
Is it a way for them to see how much they can get away with? If the judge allows this temporary may issue scheme, they might try to push the same garbage in the final legislation. They get a free test on how restrictive they can be.
Of course we are opposed to making public permit holders. But if their may issue scheme goes thru more or less as is , it would be great to show that the Permits overwhelmingly went to politicians , contributors , and celebs.
Of course we are opposed to making public permit holders. But if their may issue scheme goes thru more or less as is , it would be great to show that the Permits overwhelmingly went to politicians , contributors , and celebs.
councilwoman Yvette Alexander (D-Ward 7) made her feelings on gun owners very clear.
“Who cares about the confidentiality of a gun owner? We don’t want it, so expose yourself,”
Really?
CONCEALED CARRY so we can tell everyone
NRA says they will continue to fight this. Not sure how this meshes with Gura and SAF's litigation plan.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...re-obviously-going-to-continue-to-fight-this/