22 replies to this topic

[InterestedBystander]

Could not get the board to display image although it shows in Post Preview *dunno*

https://pbs.twimg.co...jpg&name=medium

https://sigalelaw.co...cation-process/

The Law Firm of David G. Sigale, P.C. is co-counsel in the cause of Michael White, who has for years attempted to obtain an Illinois concealed carry license. His case has repeatedly been referred to the Concealed Carry Licensing Review Board, where the false presumptions about long-ago alleged occurrences, and the lack of a hearing to be allowed to rebut them, have repeatedly resulted in a wrongful denial of Mr. Whites application. The CCL system thus has not only denied Mr. Whites application up until now, but works to guarantee that he will never be able to meet the artificial standards imposed by the Review Board. The Firm has joined a lawsuit to challenge this unconstitutional denial of Mr. Whites Second Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment due process rights. If you have had problems dealing with the Review Board or the CCL application process in general, please contact the Firm for a consultation.

Edited by InterestedBystander, 07 May 2019 - 11:49 PM.

[THE KING]

About time.

With all of the members here there should be a lot of plaintiffs.

[Mr. Fife]

I might be IN.

[InterestedBystander]

I might be IN.

Eh? I looked first if I should be IN and did not find any reference to a White/ISRA case. Of course that does not mean there was not one

[THE KING]

I would like to see the whole application process get challenged not just the CCLRB. There's so many over burdensome requirements and challenges to just apply for a license which makes it so difficult. Let alone just trying to make contact with the ISP.

[Black Flag]

I found the complaint.

Attached Files

•  Michael-White-and-ISRA-Complaint4096-1.pdf   205.13KB   372 downloads

[InterestedBystander]

I found the complaint.

Thanks. Where did you find it i.e. do you have a direct link to a court website?

edit: https://sigalelaw.co...laint4096-1.pdf

Edited by InterestedBystander, 10 May 2019 - 04:24 AM.

[Flynn]

The entire preponderance of the evidence, threshold being used to deny a right just smacks the 5th and 14th (as well as court precedent) in the face!

[TomKoz]

Maybe we will see a ruling in say 8-9 years !!!

[THE KING]

Maybe we will see a ruling in say 8-9 years !!!

There is the problem. 2nd amendment cases should be heard and decided upon immediately.

[mikew]

 

Maybe we will see a ruling in say 8-9 years !!!

There is the problem. 2nd amendment cases should be heard and decided upon immediately.

 

 

How long did McDonald v Chicago take?

 

Moore v Madigan?

[THE KING]

 

 

Maybe we will see a ruling in say 8-9 years !!!

There is the problem. 2nd amendment cases should be heard and decided upon immediately.

 

 

How long did McDonald v Chicago take?

 

Moore v Madigan?

 

I'm not quite sure, but look at some of the other cases.

 

Wilson v Cook County. That has been going on for almost a decade.

[Black Flag]

 

I found the complaint.

Thanks. Where did you find it i.e. do you have a direct link to a court website?

 

I did a search.

https://www.google.c...hael white ISRA

[mikew]

 

 

 

How long did McDonald v Chicago take?

 

Moore v Madigan?

 

I'm not quite sure, but look at some of the other cases.

 

Wilson v Cook County. That has been going on for almost a decade.

 

 

McDonald v Chicago:  Filed in June of 2008, ruled on by SCOTUS in June  of 2010;

 

Moore v Madigan: Filed in May of 2011, decided in Dec 2012, with an additional decree in Feb 2013

Shepard v Madigan, later combined with Moore, was also filed in 2011.

 

Wilson is another circumstance.  It was a state case, but has been refiled as a Federal case.

[THE KING]

No, Wilson is another case in regards to the second amendment. It's no just another circumstance.

My point is that every case that involves the Second amendment should be heard with due diligence and in a timely manner. Not just the cases they decide to hear.

[mikew]

No, Wilson is another case in regards to the second amendment. It's no just another circumstance.

My point is that every case that involves the Second amendment should be heard with due diligence and in a timely manner. Not just the cases they decide to hear.

What we want does not always line up with what we get. 

 

Yes, Wilson is an important second amendment case, and how it got where it is now is a different narrative.

 

Yes, the courts should hear all cases the way we want them heard, and when.  "-)

 

And, FYI, Mr Wilson is a member here.

[mab22]

So in this case, you can be on a “list” and that list does not prohibit you from getting a FOID and legally purchasing a firearm, BUT if you want a permit to legally carry it in public.... No! But you can own a firearm. Makes no sense.
Welcome to Illinoisistania.

[C0untZer0]

David Sigale ?

[InterestedBystander]

David Sigale ?

Yes, the attorney co-counsel who has been on a number of 2A cases...and????

[JTHunter]

I found the complaint.

 

Good grief !

 

That PDF reads like a laundry list of errors.  It is interesting to note that this case involves those licensed thugs in C®ook County and the CPD.  No surprise there.  The "victim" has been darted.

[ChicagoRonin70]

Again, I think I need to eventually contact this David Sigale fellow. 

[InterestedBystander]

*delete*

Edited by InterestedBystander, 10 May 2019 - 04:23 AM.

[mikew]

David Sigale ?

What about Mr. Sigale? 
He wins cases.