Jump to content


Photo

Culp vs Madigan - Lawsuit Filed On Behalf of Non-Residents


  • Please log in to reply
810 replies to this topic

#121 kwc

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 3,417 posts
  • Joined: 17-December 13

Posted 12 February 2015 - 01:18 PM

Thank you, skinnyb82!!!

Links are now also posted in the public archive:

http://ia801404.us.a...910.docket.html

Edited by kwc, 12 February 2015 - 01:20 PM.

"Let us not become weary in doing good, for at the proper time we will reap a harvest if we do not give up." - Galations 6:9 (NIV)

"If you can't explain it to a six-year old, you don't understand it yourself." - Albert Einstein (paraphrased)

#122 domin8

    Banned!

  • Members
  • 7,299 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 13

Posted 12 February 2015 - 01:19 PM

There's no minimum, my PACER bill was less than $40 last quarter.  If it's below $30, they zero it out...or they used to.  The federal court system set a cutoff where they'll wipe the bill if it's under a certain amount.  Anyway, here's the two motions for extension of time to file response *gag* and the response itself.  Excuses....excuses.  "This is a holiday....I've been assigned too many cases...."  Oh, and get used to this since they lack knowledge or sufficient information to form a belief about the truth of the allegations set forth in paragraphs....9 through 28, in the complaint (plaintiffs).
 
"X. Defendants lack knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the
truth of the allegations in paragraph X."
 
Evidently, this is a misquote because, you know, the state disagrees with the opinion itself.....
 
"33. The Second Amendment “is fully applicable against the States.” McDonald v. City of Chicago, 561 U.S. 3025, 130 S. Ct. 3020, 3026 (2010)."
 
And here's what the state had to say about that....
 
"33. Defendants deny that Plaintiffs have accurately quoted or cited McDonald v. City
of Chicago, 561 U.S. 742 (2010). Defendants admit that the Second Amendment is applicable to
the States under the Fourteenth Amendment."
 
Let's see what else the state disagrees with.  Oh, this one is good.
 
"36. There is a fundamental right to carry handguns for self-defense in public. Moore v. Madigan, 702 F.3d 933 (7th Cir., 2012)"
 
Lisa says "NOOOOO" because that's dead wrong.....
 
"36. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 36."
 
Oh, "We're gonna enforce this until you tell us to not enforce it...."
 
"57. The State Police defendants admit that they will continue to enforce the
challenged law in the absence of an injunction. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in
paragraph 57."
 
Here's all of the briefs....
 
First extension (30 days), second extension (14 days) on top of the 60 days already provided by the FRCP
 


 
State Response
 

 

Thanks again for everything skinny. When I clicked on the link kwc provided I was given the image below. I couldn't find a way around it.

3106b6f1555befedbb5f5678d2244669.jpg
I'm either banned, going to be banned, or just returned from being banned. The truth hurts.

#123 skinnyb82

    Member

  • Members
  • 7,090 posts
  • Joined: 07-November 12

Posted 12 February 2015 - 01:33 PM

Ooohhh, yeah that's no good.  Go here for PACER registration: https://www.pacer.gov/reg_pacer.html

 

You need a CC # on file for recurring billing, but if you watch how many documents you pull then you may be fee exempt if you don't exceed a certain amount. Dockets are also 10 cents per page (it costs about $2 just to pull the Shepard docket in ILSD).  I suggest using Firefox or Chrome, get the RECAP plugin so every document you pull will be archived, along with the docket itself.


NRA Member
SAF Member
C&R License Holder

#124 domin8

    Banned!

  • Members
  • 7,299 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 13

Posted 12 February 2015 - 01:38 PM

Thanks again Skinny.
I'm either banned, going to be banned, or just returned from being banned. The truth hurts.

#125 kwc

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 3,417 posts
  • Joined: 17-December 13

Posted 12 February 2015 - 01:43 PM

Thanks again for everything skinny. When I clicked on the link kwc provided I was given the image below. I couldn't find a way around it.

My link (once you cancel the splash screen) displayed a summary of filings. I didn't intend that to be the portal into PACER. Sorry if I threw you for a loop on that one!

The public archive (post #121 above) now reflects the same actions/filings.

Edited by kwc, 12 February 2015 - 01:44 PM.

"Let us not become weary in doing good, for at the proper time we will reap a harvest if we do not give up." - Galations 6:9 (NIV)

"If you can't explain it to a six-year old, you don't understand it yourself." - Albert Einstein (paraphrased)

#126 Gamma

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,508 posts
  • Joined: 29-December 13

Posted 12 February 2015 - 02:38 PM

Thank you, skinnyb82!!!

Links are now also posted in the public archive:

http://ia801404.us.a...910.docket.html

Wow. Did they have some high school intern write that?

"We don't know anything, we have no argument, but we're right and you should decide in our favor".

Maybe they know they're going to lose and just aren't going to bother putting time into it.

If I was the judge I'd be perturbed that I gave them time extensions and that's all they sent in.

I was preparing to be annoyed by asinine, illogical and elitist legalbabble, and as it turned out it was pretty sad. They're infringing on the civil rights of millions of Americans, and that's all they can come up with in justification.

Edited by Gamma, 12 February 2015 - 02:43 PM.

Illinois' FCCA is a prime example of the maxim that sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable from malice.

#127 out in the tall grass

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 155 posts
  • Joined: 22-October 11

Posted 12 February 2015 - 03:04 PM

Their arguments sound familiar, along the lines that my dad used when I was 8. " because I said so, and that's all you need to know"

#128 ChicagoRonin70

    The Landlord of the Flies!

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 4,098 posts
  • Joined: 02-August 14

Posted 12 February 2015 - 05:01 PM

There's no minimum, my PACER bill was less than $40 last quarter.  If it's below $30, they zero it out...or they used to.  The federal court system set a cutoff where they'll wipe the bill if it's under a certain amount.  Anyway, here's the two motions for extension of time to file response *gag* and the response itself.  Excuses....excuses.  "This is a holiday....I've been assigned too many cases...."  Oh, and get used to this since they lack knowledge or sufficient information to form a belief about the truth of the allegations set forth in paragraphs....9 through 28, in the complaint (plaintiffs).

 

"X. Defendants lack knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the
truth of the allegations in paragraph X."

 

Evidently, this is a misquote because, you know, the state disagrees with the opinion itself.....

 

"33. The Second Amendment “is fully applicable against the States.” McDonald v. City of Chicago, 561 U.S. 3025, 130 S. Ct. 3020, 3026 (2010)."

 

And here's what the state had to say about that....

 

"33. Defendants deny that Plaintiffs have accurately quoted or cited McDonald v. City
of Chicago,
561 U.S. 742 (2010)
. Defendants admit that the Second Amendment is applicable to
the States under the Fourteenth Amendment."

 

Let's see what else the state disagrees with.  Oh, this one is good.

 

"36. There is a fundamental right to carry handguns for self-defense in public. Moore v. Madigan, 702 F.3d 933 (7th Cir., 2012)"
 
Lisa says "NOOOOO" because that's dead wrong.....
 
"36. Defendants deny the allegations in paragraph 36."
 

Oh, "We're gonna enforce this until you tell us to not enforce it...."

 

"57. The State Police defendants admit that they will continue to enforce the
challenged law in the absence of an injunction. Defendants deny the remaining allegations in
paragraph 57."

 

Here's all of the briefs....

 

First extension (30 days), second extension (14 days) on top of the 60 days already provided by the FRCP

 

attachicon.gifFirst.State.Motion.for.Extension.to.File.Response.DE11.0.pdf

attachicon.gifSecond.State.Motion.for.Extension.to.File.Response.DE12.0.pdf

 

State Response

 

attachicon.gifState.Response.DE13.0.pdf

 

 

That State Response . . . oh, my Gawd, that's got to be the funniest, most pathetic legal filing I've ever read! "I know nothing." "I know nothing." "I know nothing." "I don't believe them." "I disagree with them." "They should get nothing." "I don't know why they should get nothing."

 

Am I strange for laughing so hard at this foolishness that my stomach hurts? I feel that somehow I should be annoyed, since it's my tax dollars that are going to pay for these clowns to come up with at least something in the ostensible pursuit of their jobs, but it's so sad that I can't even be ruthlessly contemptuous the way they deserve. It's like watching that loud-mouthed, annoying jerk kid at school get his butt whipped in a playground fight, and still be trying to swing blindly at the air long after he's been knocked silly and the other kid walked away out of pity.


Edited by ChicagoRonin70, 12 February 2015 - 05:03 PM.

"A well educated Media, being necessary for the preservation of a free State, the right of the people to keep and read books, shall not be infringed."

 

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary for the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

 

Who gets to keep and read books? The Media? Or is it the People?

 

“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

 

 InX89li.jpg
 

 
 
 
 


#129 domin8

    Banned!

  • Members
  • 7,299 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 13

Posted 12 February 2015 - 06:47 PM

What's really funny is they needed 2 extensions to come up with that garbage. They even argued about Hiram Grau not being the head of ISP, but didn't bother to point out that he was in that position at the time of the filing of the complaint back in October.
I'm either banned, going to be banned, or just returned from being banned. The truth hurts.

#130 leadchucker

  • Members
  • 48 posts
  • Joined: 02-January 15

Posted 13 February 2015 - 02:14 AM

Not a lawyer, what's next?

NRA BENEFACTOR/GOLDEN EAGLE

ILLINOIS CONCEALED CARRY INSTRUCTOR

UTAH BCI  CFP INSTRUCTOR

NRA INSTRUCTOR- PISTOL,PPIH,PPOH,SHOTGUN,RANGE SAFTEY OFFICER

ISRA MEMBER

NSCA LEVEL I INSTRUCTOR

 

 

 


#131 III

    Domari Nolo

  • Members
  • 1,841 posts
  • Joined: 04-December 13

Posted 13 February 2015 - 06:48 AM

I'm not a lawyer either.... But what amazes me is that a judge will continue to grant extensions to a side that has no substance to their reason for asking for more time. Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin

"Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence … from the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurrences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable … the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference — they deserve a place of honor with all that's good." - George Washington


#132 domin8

    Banned!

  • Members
  • 7,299 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 13

Posted 13 February 2015 - 07:01 AM

Court
I'm either banned, going to be banned, or just returned from being banned. The truth hurts.

#133 ChicagoZman

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 135 posts
  • Joined: 05-September 13

Posted 13 February 2015 - 07:47 AM

Curious how the Sergeant Schultz defense will perform in a courtroom before a federal judge.


NRA Patron/NRA Pistol Instructor
Illinois/Utah Concealed Carry Instructor

Glock Armorer/M&P Armorer

LFI I/LFI II


#134 Gamma

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,508 posts
  • Joined: 29-December 13

Posted 13 February 2015 - 09:01 AM

Sergeant Schultz

Haha that's exactly what I thought of after reading that brief. "I know nothing, NOTHING!"
Illinois' FCCA is a prime example of the maxim that sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable from malice.

#135 Plinkermostly

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 819 posts
  • Joined: 20-April 13

Posted 13 February 2015 - 09:01 AM

Good one.

 

Only seems to work on the gov'ment side, however.



#136 ChicagoRonin70

    The Landlord of the Flies!

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 4,098 posts
  • Joined: 02-August 14

Posted 13 February 2015 - 09:53 AM

"And now we'll hear arguments from the Defense in support of their position on the case:"

 


Edited by ChicagoRonin70, 13 February 2015 - 03:01 PM.

"A well educated Media, being necessary for the preservation of a free State, the right of the people to keep and read books, shall not be infringed."

 

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary for the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

 

Who gets to keep and read books? The Media? Or is it the People?

 

“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

 

 InX89li.jpg
 

 
 
 
 


#137 skinnyb82

    Member

  • Members
  • 7,090 posts
  • Joined: 07-November 12

Posted 13 February 2015 - 01:12 PM

I'm not a lawyer either.... But what amazes me is that a judge will continue to grant extensions to a side that has no substance to their reason for asking for more time. Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

 

The district judge dumped all of the BS work on the magistrate assigned to the case which is an odd move, clearly she doesn't want to deal with pre-trial garbage filings (I wouldn't want to have to read nonsense filed by the State).  Federal magistrates are not appointed.  They are employed by the federal government and have the power to grant and deny motions, as long as they are not dispositive (motion for summary judgment,etc) in nature.  It should be noted that this case was "randomly" assigned to (District) Judge Sue Myerscough, an Obama appointee in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of Illinois, also presided over Moore et al v. Madigan et al.  She was the judge who dismissed Moore.  She also denied the State's motion to moot Moore after CA7 reversed the district courts' rulings because Plaintiffs had not obtained relief requested (carriage of stun guns, basically a total invalidation and rewrite of the UUW/AUUW).

 

It's preposterous when Local Rules give a government official who is a defendant in a lawsuit, 60 days to file an answer to the complaint when anyone else would be required to answer LONG before that.  Then the AAG assigned to the case, Josh Ratz, who also successfully defended the State in Horsley v. Trame (Obama appointee district judge ruled the FOID Card Act provision barring those under 21 from obtaining FOID without parental consent to be constitutional....his arguments were asinine, argued for rational basis more or less), is just talking out of his posterior.  The "I don't know(s)" are referring to the names and occupations of the Plaintiffs.  They truly do not know, cannot take Sigale's word for it.  It's the 44 days' worth of extensions that bother me.  It's not enough that they have 60 days to answer, they need 44 more to file...what?  This crap?  "Moore v. Madigan does not...."  This is splitting hairs because, as the majority stated in Moore v. Madigan, 792 F.3d 933, 936 (7th Cir. 2012):

 

The Second Amendment states in its entirety that "a well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed" (emphasis added). The right to "bear" as distinct from the right to "keep" arms is unlikely to refer to the home. To speak of "bearing" arms within one's home would at all times have been an awkward usage. A right to bear arms thus implies a right to carry a loaded gun outside the home.

 

The majority distinguishes armed self-defense from criminal action, armed self-defense being a constitutional right rather than a property right in Moore v. Madigan, 792 F.3d 933, 937 (7th Cir. 2012):

 

To confine the right to be armed to the home is to divorce the Second Amendment from the right of self-defense described in Heller and McDonald. It is not a property right — a right to kill a houseguest who in a fit of aesthetic fury tries to slash your copy of Norman Rockwell's painting Santa with Elves. That is not self-defense, and this case like Heller and McDonald is just about self-defense.

 

So, to state that Moore did not establish that armed self-defense outside the home is a right, would be....a Clintonesque splitting of hairs, parsing of words....."It depends on what your definition of the word 'is,' is."

 

The delays, well let's see....

 

"2. The undersigned requires additional time to confer with his clients for the purpose
of adequately responding to the issues and facts alleged in the complaint."

 

60 days isn't enough?  Well, it gets better in the second motion for an extension because Mr. Ratz admits that he's in violation of the Code of Professional Conduct by taking on a caseload which interferes with his ability to adequately defend his "clients."  He was granted an extension, then goes and "leaves the office" for four days (presumably on vacation), then he states that he had about three cases to handle before answering the complaint in Culp.  Bottom line, Lisa...you need more AAGs.  Like, a few dozen more.

 

"2. Since the entry of the Court’s order granting a first extension, the undersigned
was out of the office
January 5, 2015 through January 9, 2015. Upon returning January 12, 2015,
the undersigned was assigned to second chair a trial....."


NRA Member
SAF Member
C&R License Holder

#138 leadchucker

  • Members
  • 48 posts
  • Joined: 02-January 15

Posted 14 February 2015 - 12:31 AM

Thanks for sharing your insights skinnyb82.Very enlightening.

NRA BENEFACTOR/GOLDEN EAGLE

ILLINOIS CONCEALED CARRY INSTRUCTOR

UTAH BCI  CFP INSTRUCTOR

NRA INSTRUCTOR- PISTOL,PPIH,PPOH,SHOTGUN,RANGE SAFTEY OFFICER

ISRA MEMBER

NSCA LEVEL I INSTRUCTOR

 

 

 


#139 Indigo

    Just another silver-haired devil

  • Members
  • 3,220 posts
  • Joined: 30-April 11

Posted 14 February 2015 - 08:41 AM

Thanks for sharing your insights skinnyb82.Very enlightening.

+1  I always look for new content with you screen name attached.


  • They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but it’s not one half so bad as a lot of ignorance

#140 kwc

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 3,417 posts
  • Joined: 17-December 13

Posted 19 February 2015 - 02:03 PM

PACER shows this update as of Feb 13:

NOTICE OF HEARING: Rule 16 Scheduling Conference set Thursday, 3/26/2015, at 11:00 AM by telephone (court will place call) before U.S. Magistrate Judge Tom Schanzle-Haskins. Attorneys are directed to comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f) by meeting as soon as practicable, and in any event at least fourteen (14) days prior to the scheduling conference, and are to submit a proposed discovery plan in writing to the Court on or before 3/24/2015. Such a plan must include, at a minimum, those items listed in CDIL-LR 26.2(3), Rule 16( b ), Rule 26(f), and CDIL-LR 16.2(E) with proposed deadlines. The parties are directed to specifically address the provisions, if any, for discovery or disclosure of electronically stored information, and to discuss agreements, if any, the parties reach for asserting claims of privilege or of protection as trial preparation material, after inadvertent production. Any plan filed shall specifically address the need, or lack thereof, concerning discovery of electronically stored information. If a discovery plan is not submitted as required, the scheduling hearing will not be held and costs may be assessed. Lead counsel or other counsel of record with knowledge of the case should be available to participate in the Rule 16 scheduling hearing. (LB, ilcd)


Edited by kwc, 19 February 2015 - 02:09 PM.

"Let us not become weary in doing good, for at the proper time we will reap a harvest if we do not give up." - Galations 6:9 (NIV)

"If you can't explain it to a six-year old, you don't understand it yourself." - Albert Einstein (paraphrased)

#141 skinnyb82

    Member

  • Members
  • 7,090 posts
  • Joined: 07-November 12

Posted 22 February 2015 - 02:27 PM

That's simple case management since the federal courts require the parties to at least "try to work it out" and, if that's not possible, set a joint case management schedule.


NRA Member
SAF Member
C&R License Holder

#142 borgranta

    Member

  • Members
  • 5,978 posts
  • Joined: 29-June 12

Posted 25 February 2015 - 10:51 AM

What happens if a non-resident of ILLINOIS has a non-resident Virginia CCW?  Would a non-resident of ILLINOIS that qualifies under the substantially similar laws of virginia to qualify for a CCW license use the non-resident license to show that he or she qualifies for an FCCL by holding the valid non-resident license from substantially similar Virgina?


The following referral code will grant provide a new User of Uber a free ride up to $15
donaldd4557ui

#143 borgranta

    Member

  • Members
  • 5,978 posts
  • Joined: 29-June 12

Posted 25 February 2015 - 10:53 AM

If the plaintiffs all appy and receive a valid non-resident CCW license from substantially similar Virginia than they will have a stronger case since they qualify to carry under the substantially similar Viriginia laws.


The following referral code will grant provide a new User of Uber a free ride up to $15
donaldd4557ui

#144 III

    Domari Nolo

  • Members
  • 1,841 posts
  • Joined: 04-December 13

Posted 25 February 2015 - 11:27 AM

I am downloading the application for Virginia now....


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin

"Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence … from the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurrences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable … the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference — they deserve a place of honor with all that's good." - George Washington


#145 Gamma

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,508 posts
  • Joined: 29-December 13

Posted 25 February 2015 - 11:55 AM

If you don't have an address in one of those 4 states (or IL), the website won't let you continue the application.
Illinois' FCCA is a prime example of the maxim that sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable from malice.

#146 III

    Domari Nolo

  • Members
  • 1,841 posts
  • Joined: 04-December 13

Posted 25 February 2015 - 12:09 PM

If you don't have an address in one of those 4 states (or IL), the website won't let you continue the application.

 

True.....but what about the paper application: http://www.isp.state...ails.cfm?ID=804


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin

"Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence … from the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurrences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable … the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference — they deserve a place of honor with all that's good." - George Washington


#147 domin8

    Banned!

  • Members
  • 7,299 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 13

Posted 25 February 2015 - 12:11 PM

Umm, I actually have a Virginia nonresident permit. Todd has even seen it, yet I'm not a plaintiff.
I'm either banned, going to be banned, or just returned from being banned. The truth hurts.

#148 kwc

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 3,417 posts
  • Joined: 17-December 13

Posted 25 February 2015 - 01:11 PM

 True.....but what about the paper application: http://www.isp.state...ails.cfm?ID=804


Your driver's license and your concealed carry permit must match, so unless you have a DL and a carry license both from Virginia, for instance, even the "paper" application cannot be submitted. ISP won't be able to complete the phone interview.

Edited by kwc, 25 February 2015 - 10:08 PM.

"Let us not become weary in doing good, for at the proper time we will reap a harvest if we do not give up." - Galations 6:9 (NIV)

"If you can't explain it to a six-year old, you don't understand it yourself." - Albert Einstein (paraphrased)

#149 stm

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,971 posts
  • Joined: 26-April 11

Posted 26 February 2015 - 04:13 PM

Why is it that Illinois will issue a Firearms Control Card ("tan card") to armed security guards who live in bordering states, but will not issue a CCL to those same guards? Double standard...

yea everyone makes fun of the redneck till the zombies show up. . .


#150 III

    Domari Nolo

  • Members
  • 1,841 posts
  • Joined: 04-December 13

Posted 26 February 2015 - 04:16 PM

Because the ISP is choosing to blatantly misinterpret the intention of the FCCA...


Edited by III, 26 February 2015 - 04:17 PM.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin

"Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence … from the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurrences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable … the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference — they deserve a place of honor with all that's good." - George Washington





3 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 3 guests, 0 anonymous users