Jump to content


Photo

SAF Supports Lawsuit To Nullify Cook County AWB


  • Please log in to reply
10 replies to this topic

#1 Hipshot Percussion

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 2,306 posts
  • Joined: 05-February 14

Posted 28 August 2017 - 08:27 AM

From Firearm Owners Against Crime

 

BELLEVUE, Wash., July 31, 2017 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The Second Amendment Foundation and Illinois State Rifle Association are supporting a lawsuit by two Illinois residents seeking a permanent injunction against a ban on so-called "assault weapons" adopted in Cook County more than ten years ago, in a case filed in Cook County Circuit Court.

 

Plaintiffs in the action are Matthew D. Wilson and Troy Edhlund. They are represented by attorney David G. Sigale of Glen Ellyn.

 

The case is a re-filing of an action in 2007 that challenged the ordinance on constitutional grounds. Plaintiffs allege that, "The Cook County Assault Weapons Ordinance, as amended and adopted on November 14, 2006, violates the due process clause of the U.S. Constitution, as applied to the States by the 14th Amendment, because of vagueness in its definition language of 'assault weapons.'

 

SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb said the lawsuit is necessary because the ordinance defines "assault weapons" in a way that is both vague and arbitrary, without providing any explanation why certain firearms are prohibited.

"Recent violent history in the City of Chicago clearly demonstrates that this prohibition has not prevented a single slaying or injurious shooting," Gottlieb observed. "The only thing such gun control laws accomplish is to penalize law-abiding citizens for crimes they didn't commit. Meanwhile, the real criminals have engaged in wholesale mayhem."

 

The lawsuit also notes that under the ordinance, commonly-owned semiautomatic sporting shotguns and rifles could be banned due to the language of the law.

 

"Laws like this should never be written in the first place," Gottlieb said, "and especially they shouldn't be written by people who do not appear to know anything about firearms."

 

The Second Amendment Foundation (www.saf.org) is the nation's oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms.  Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 650,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control. 

 

View original content:http://www.prnewswir...-300496712.html

 

SOURCE Second Amendment Foundation

 

http://www.satprnews...ult-weapon-ban/

 

“I have fought the good fight to the end; I have run the race to the finish: I have kept the faith."  Timothy Chapter 4 verse 7

 

"Legitimate self-defense has absolutely nothing to do with the criminal misuse of guns."   Gerald Vernon, veteran firearms instructor

 

New Gunner Journal

 


#2 Jeffrey

    Member

  • Members
  • 4,194 posts
  • Joined: 10-January 08

Posted 28 August 2017 - 09:39 AM

Rest assured, Rahm has a pen ready to write a check.


...and justice for all

YOUR WALLET, the only place Democrats care to drill

#3 Raw Power

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 410 posts
  • Joined: 26-April 16

Posted 28 August 2017 - 11:56 AM

Unfortunately, this one looks like it will be an uphill battle after the recent out-of-state rulings that were upheld, but fingers crossed on it.



#4 solareclipse2

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,998 posts
  • Joined: 07-January 13

Posted 28 August 2017 - 12:23 PM

 

 

the lawsuit is necessary because the ordinance defines "assault weapons" in a way that is both vague and arbitrary, without providing any explanation why certain firearms are prohibited.

 

 

Sounds like a great way to get them to specifically define assault weapons and get them to ban even more stuff. 


I WILL LOSE EVERY ARGUMENT FROM NOW ON, I WILL WALK AWAY FROM EVERY FIGHT OR CONFRONTATION, I WILL TAKE THE HIGH ROAD.

#5 mikew

    Member

  • Members
  • 4,010 posts
  • Joined: 17-December 04

Posted 28 August 2017 - 01:29 PM

Rest assured, Rahm has a pen ready to write a check.

With other people's money.



#6 Mr. Fife

    Nip it

  • Members
  • 13,046 posts
  • Joined: 03-July 10

Posted 28 August 2017 - 07:20 PM

Time to renew my all of my memberships. This thread reminds me that I've been slacking

Have all boated who fish?
Have all boated who fish?
Have all boated who fish?

 

 


#7 ChicagoRonin70

    The Landlord of the Flies!

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 2,908 posts
  • Joined: 02-August 14

Posted 28 August 2017 - 10:03 PM

I wonder if they are interested in having additional plaintiffs join the suit? I'll happily throw in with that, if I can't find a new 2nd Amendment attorney to work with me on challenging the public transportation concealed carry ban.


“One can never underestimate the idiocy of those determined to be offended by things that don't affect their real lives in the slightest.” —Me
 
“Hatred is the sharpest sword; the desire for peace is armor made of willow leaves in the face of an enemy who despises you, as neither alone will stop a strike that is aimed at your neck.” —Samurai proverb
 
“An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.” —Robert Heinlein
 
“I reserve the right to take any action necessary to maintain the equilibrium in which I've chosen to exist.” —Me
 
"It ain't braggin' if you done it." —Will Rogers

 

Gb1XExdm.jpg
 
 

 
 
 
 


#8 MrTriple

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,800 posts
  • Joined: 22-April 13

Posted 29 August 2017 - 07:35 AM

Unfortunately, this one looks like it will be an uphill battle after the recent out-of-state rulings that were upheld, but fingers crossed on it.


I disagree. I really do believe that the reason why the SCOTUS isn't taking these cases is because the constitutionalists view Justice Kennedy as unreliable on 2A issues.
"The point of [so-called "assault weapon" bans]...is not to ban firearms that are dangerous, it's to ban firearms that gun owners want to own because the people making the laws don't like gun owners. If we want to buy non-semiauto AR-style rifles, they'll ban those too, and for the same reason."

-Hapless

#9 Hipshot Percussion

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 2,306 posts
  • Joined: 05-February 14

Posted 29 August 2017 - 11:56 AM

 

Unfortunately, this one looks like it will be an uphill battle after the recent out-of-state rulings that were upheld, but fingers crossed on it.


I disagree. I really do believe that the reason why the SCOTUS isn't taking these cases is because the constitutionalists view Justice Kennedy as unreliable on 2A issues.

 

+1 on that.


“I have fought the good fight to the end; I have run the race to the finish: I have kept the faith."  Timothy Chapter 4 verse 7

 

"Legitimate self-defense has absolutely nothing to do with the criminal misuse of guns."   Gerald Vernon, veteran firearms instructor

 

New Gunner Journal

 


#10 Raw Power

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 410 posts
  • Joined: 26-April 16

Posted 29 August 2017 - 02:18 PM

 

Unfortunately, this one looks like it will be an uphill battle after the recent out-of-state rulings that were upheld, but fingers crossed on it.


I disagree. I really do believe that the reason why the SCOTUS isn't taking these cases is because the constitutionalists view Justice Kennedy as unreliable on 2A issues.

 

 

I believe that the reason why the SCOTUS isn't taking any of these cases, is because there's a lot more to be gained (namely money) by keeping this pro-gun, anti-2nd amendment fight going... If it was settled once and for all, how many organizations on both sides would no longer be able to beat the war drums?



#11 MrTriple

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,800 posts
  • Joined: 22-April 13

Posted 29 August 2017 - 02:38 PM

Unfortunately, this one looks like it will be an uphill battle after the recent out-of-state rulings that were upheld, but fingers crossed on it.


I disagree. I really do believe that the reason why the SCOTUS isn't taking these cases is because the constitutionalists view Justice Kennedy as unreliable on 2A issues.
 
I believe that the reason why the SCOTUS isn't taking any of these cases, is because there's a lot more to be gained (namely money) by keeping this pro-gun, anti-2nd amendment fight going... If it was settled once and for all, how many organizations on both sides would no longer be able to beat the war drums?

While the gun control movement would be absolutely devastated overnight if the SCOTUS issues another good ruling on the 2nd amendment, gun rights groups will always exist because they do more than just legal advocacy. And there's always the risk of someone coming along and trying to launch new attacks on our rights.
"The point of [so-called "assault weapon" bans]...is not to ban firearms that are dangerous, it's to ban firearms that gun owners want to own because the people making the laws don't like gun owners. If we want to buy non-semiauto AR-style rifles, they'll ban those too, and for the same reason."

-Hapless




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users