Rangerdeepv
-
Posts
1,202 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Rangerdeepv
-
-
They are great for the price. I personally don't care for them though.
-
On 11/16/2023 at 10:46 AM, steveTA84 said:
This guy lays it out pretty good. He is pretty accurate on is predictions like St. ToddV.
-
On 4/28/2023 at 2:38 PM, jsg-07 said:
So, if I understand correctly, we still have to win the legal battles and this is not fully over. However while the battles are being fought, the judge is basically blocking the enforcement of the law?
True.........this is the opening salvo. There is no way Pizza the Hut and Swami Kwame are going to let this one lie.
-
The Dum0craps play the long game with these types of bills. Bait and switch, make them so ridiculous that after all the banter there is actually a bill that reads not so ridiculous, gut the original and fill with something totally unrelated to the title, blatantly violate Illinois state constitution and a whole host of other 'tricks'. Madigan did keep some of the more crazy bills off the docket but without his crooked arse in the Speaker's chair we have a rubber stamp.
-
124 days since I lost mine...............still Under Review.
-
Keeping more than fingers and toes crossed. Surprised they are leading the SCOTUS on this one, although it seems the ISC does not care if any of their decisions are over turned.
-
Two pieces of good news in one day with regard to 2A?
WOW!
-
Unless the money is REAL good........................don't!
-
Applied 11/3/2014
Active 2/10/2015
Card in hand 2/12/2015
Barnett v. Raoul (3:23-cv-00209) (S.D. Ill. 2023) - NSSF Gun/Mag Ban
in Judicial Second Amendment Case Discussion
Posted
Even if it is GVR'd or flat out overturned via a legal precedent.........what enforcement does the SCOTUS have over any lower courts? This Festerbrook character and a couple other ding-a-lings sitting on the bench just appear to be flaunting their resistance right in front of the SCOTUS. Seriously..........what are the consequences to these judges for 'breaking the precedent'?