All Activity
- Past hour
- Today
-
Varghese said he had filed the appropriate paperwork to “preserve these arguments for appeal” but that the judge "rejected these arguments, and she went out of her way to limit me.” This is what we face in many courts nowadays, they are no longer trying to hide it... https://redstate.com/jeffc/2024/04/22/brooklyn-man-convicted-over-gun-hobby-by-biased-ny-court-could-be-facing-harsh-sentence-n2173162
-
On April 22, the (federal) judge dismissed Count II of the complaint without prejudice. Count II is/was the count challenging IL's venue-shifting law. The judge also denied the plaintiff's motion to have the case remanded back to state court. In other words, the case is now just to order the state to issue Myers a FOID, and it's staying in federal court.
- Yesterday
-
I beg to differ, we have a long history of the ATF making stuff up as they go along and changing the rules on the fly, those changes have real-life legal consequences that turn people into felons for something they may have legally owned for years, this needs to end and this case could end that and in the end that is a good thing for the 2nd community... And who knows, with all the lower courts ignoring Heller/Bruen I would not be surprised if the court walks the line and possibly tosses in a reminder or two about Heller/Bruen to put the lower courts on notice...
-
Your argument #4 is reminiscent of things we used to hear about fanny pack carry, when folks would sometimes insist that a lack of charges was itself evidence of enforcement because we couldn't show that the charges were dropped, or deserved but not imposed. Sometimes it's as simple as there being no charges. The rest of the things you mentioned are a result of voluntary compliance, not enforcement. You are assuming things about that compliance that may or may not be the case.
-
State pre-emption for handgun magazine capacity?
RyanB425 replied to dukemason's topic in Illinois Right to Keep and Carry
That is if you get caught and the only way you get caught is doing something stupid. Disclaimer : I am not an attorney. -
I am going to disagree 1000% w/enforcement. 1. Are banned firearms being sold at local gun shops or being shipped in from online sales. NOPE. The law is ENFORCEMENT. 2. The State's immediate challenge of the Injunction: (which won) froze sales, put almost all sales in limbo, and cost FFL Dealers thousands of dollars in return shipping cost, refunds, credit card fees, and down right p*****-OFF CUSTOMERS. ENFORCEMENT SUCCESSFUL. 3. Because of vague interpretions of PICA, more firearms & accessories are being banned than needs to be. ENFORCEMENT has flourished. 4. Now, if you meant criminal charges, who has direct knowledge of traffic/criminal stops where the person was in violation of PICA and NOT charged?
-
I will LMAO if Hunter is the guy that finally gets this stupid question off of the 4473
-
Not to stray too far off topic, but it isn't just that they haven't enforced it. They found out they have no reasonable way to enforce it. And it's not just the sheriffs. Municipal chiefs are quietly avoiding it. Even ISP, when they got done making rules that tried to make the statute workable, didn't bother with the public outreach campaign mandated in the law. They passed this with the expectation of obedience. They achieved, from many gun owners, irrelevance. They are wondering at this point what they can actually pass going forward, that won't be ignored. They are wondering if anything else is being ignored. With no encouragement from anyone, they've been given a huge grass roots wake up call. When you look at the overall picture I think there are some victories to be found. Defining that only in terms of injunctions is short sighted.
-
I have to admit that it's kind of nice to be in a win-win position when it comes to firearms and the legal system. I'm still pretty sure they'll find a way to cheat.
-
4473 in unconstitutional bunk anyway