Barnett v. Raoul (3:23-cv-00209) (S.D. Ill. 2023) - NSSF Gun/Mag Ban

[mab22]

On 10/26/2024 at 2:21 PM, Dumak_from_arfcom said:

 

I agree with you.  IMO, that is why we need to come up with a legal theory that would allow gun owners to file 1983 lawsuits against state lawmakers.  

 

Before anyone states it can't be done because of  immunity.  Immunity does not survive fraud and the courts have expanded what constitutes fraud.  In the Sandy Hook case, it was ruled that the gun was marketed to children - and the judge ruled that was unethical. So immunity didn't apply for Bushmaster.    

 

I think most of us would argue that the general assembly acted unethically in how they passed PICA. 

There is an org, Institute for Justice, https://ij.org/, working on the "immunity" approach, although it may not appear to be at the state level, or law maker level.
HOWEVER, if there are other approaches, where the state is abusing it's authority, such as passing laws without using the constitutional process set by the state constitution, AND there is more to be presented then "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED", like some other laws passed the same way that are not constitution maybe organizations like this would assist?

https://ij.org/issues/project-on-immunity-and-accountability/

 

Edited October 27, 2024 at 04:34 PM by mab22
verbaage

[Dumak_from_arfcom]

On 10/26/2024 at 2:32 PM, davel501 said:

 

You don't want to go down this road. 

 

This would open pro gun legislators to wrongful death lawsuits, not to mention all the other 3rd rail issues you may vote a politician in because they support. 

 

Well, that is the problem.  The other side can get around protections and still get gunmakers and FFLs.  

 

We don't have the ability. There is nothing to stop IL from throwing a NY tantrum and passing an even bigger infringement after PICA is tossed out.  There is to much Everytown money coming in for the lawmakers to not do it. 

 

[MrTriple]

On 10/27/2024 at 1:21 PM, Dumak_from_arfcom said:

 

Well, that is the problem.  The other side can get around protections and still get gunmakers and FFLs.  

 

We don't have the ability. There is nothing to stop IL from throwing a NY tantrum and passing an even bigger infringement after PICA is tossed out.  There is to much Everytown money coming in for the lawmakers to not do it. 

 

But going back to my previous comment, even that isn't a guarantee in the long run. When the gun control movement loses their precious "assault weapon" ban, do you really think that Bloomberg is going to continue funding these organizations? He didn't become a billionaire throwing good money after bad. If he doesn't think he's going to be able to get a return on his investment anymore, he'll pull the funds and start donating to some other political cause unrelated to guns.

[mab22]

On 10/27/2024 at 2:57 PM, MrTriple said:

But going back to my previous comment, even that isn't a guarantee in the long run. When the gun control movement loses their precious ""assault weapon"" ban, do you really think that Bloomberg is going to continue funding these organizations? He didn't become a billionaire throwing good money after bad. If he doesn't think he's going to be able to get a return on his investment anymore, he'll pull the funds and start donating to some other political cause unrelated to guns.

I don’t see how he ever gets a return on any of the left wing causes he funds or supports, he makes his money elsewhere and spends it on pet projects like this stuff.

 

Sadly he wins until it gets overruled, which them goes to the appellate court, which they then appeal to the Supreme Court if they loose at the appellate level. If they win they we have to go to the Supreme Court. 
Meanwhile for a few years at least, your property has been essentially seized by the government, you can’t sell it in the state, and the government gets its way until the Supreme says otherwise. 

If only there was a way to challenge the government essentially “seizing” your property. 
 

 

[mab22]

On 10/26/2024 at 10:54 PM, TomKoz said:

When Trump wins the White House, and IF we get a majority in House and Senate - can the Federal Government pass a Law that any laws (Local, State, or Federal) passed that MAY infringe on Constitutional Rights Shall be considered Unconstitutional until such time that the US Supreme Court deems said specific law(s) to actually be Constitutional??

 

Problem Solved.

Hmmm perhaps an amendment to the constitution? 🤔

 

Something like this could be a start: But it’s not in 2 A….. SHUCKS!

Quote

No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

 

[Dumak_from_arfcom]

On 10/27/2024 at 2:57 PM, MrTriple said:

But going back to my previous comment, even that isn't a guarantee in the long run. When the gun control movement loses their precious ""assault weapon"" ban, do you really think that Bloomberg is going to continue funding these organizations? He didn't become a billionaire throwing good money after bad. If he doesn't think he's going to be able to get a return on his investment anymore, he'll pull the funds and start donating to some other political cause unrelated to guns.

 

I don't believe the left will stop if they lose this.   Civilian disarmament is a prerequisite for their planned grand socialist state.  

[Molly B.]

Ragsbo,  several of your posts and responses to your posts have been removed from view for violating the code of conduct.  Please respect the code of conduct.  Thank you. 

[davel501]

On 10/27/2024 at 8:30 PM, Dumak_from_arfcom said:

 

I don't believe the left will stop if they lose this.   Civilian disarmament is a prerequisite for their planned grand socialist state.  

 

1000%. It's frightening that so few people can see this. 

[ragsbo]

On 10/27/2024 at 10:42 PM, Molly B. said:

Ragsbo,  several of your posts and responses to your posts have been removed from view for violating the code of conduct.  Please respect the code of conduct.  Thank you. 

Please PM me and let me know which posts you are talking about and tell me how they violated the code of conduct for future reference.

[MrTriple]

On 10/27/2024 at 8:30 PM, Dumak_from_arfcom said:

 

I don't believe the left will stop if they lose this.   Civilian disarmament is a prerequisite for their planned grand socialist state.  

They won't stop right away, certainly, but after a certain point even the most dedicated individual will become demoralized and lose their excitement if their signature issue is struck down.

 

The ban is simply too important to them and they realistically don't have a Plan B. What else can they possibly pursue that isn't a paltry pile of scrap by comparison? All the money in the world couldn't save the Temperance movement, and they were arguably more powerful than the gun control movement ever was. If they couldn't stave off an inevitable collapse post-Prohibition, how can the gun control movement do the same post-ban?

[mab22]

On 10/27/2024 at 8:30 PM, Dumak_from_arfcom said:

 

I don't believe the left will stop if they lose this.   Civilian disarmament is a prerequisite for their planned grand socialist state.  

It doesn't matter what you say, how you say it, whether you do it in smoke signal, Morse code, sign language, plain English.

You just wont convince some people that they will not stop, until they do it again. Then they anti's will pull another move, and you know what they say?

That'll never happen again, they are done for! 

And then guess what happens.... 🤦‍♂️, and they what do they say? 🤕

 

[MrTriple]

But I'm not the only one who's noticed this trend. Here's a good explanation of what I'm getting at:

 

 

[MrTriple]

I'm particular, this part of their article is intriguing:

 

"The term used to be "gun control". The public's long-term shift towards gun rights meant that had to change to what we see today. "Gun safety", "common sense gun laws", "gun violence prevention", and "gun reform" are the versions of "gun control" that poll better.

 

We see this in what people are willing to say in public, too. Cory Booker recently announced the gun control plank of his 2020 platform. It's the normal stuff (licensing, banning standard-capacity magazines and incorrectly-shaped rifle grips, rate-limiting handgun purchases to one per month, etc.), but what's particularly interesting is what it doesn't include: a handgun ban...

 

...In a few decades, these groups were reduced from organizing a national handgun ban to scrapping for esoteric red flag laws in a handful of states. And the key issue is why they redrew their ambitions: gun rights got popular."

 

The Illinois ban really is a final hurrah sorta thing. Grandiose, attention-getting, but futile. What can they possibly do next? They already did registration, and that isn't gonna last either. Make the FOID may-issue? Good luck. Bump stock ban? Already done. Waiting periods? Already got that.

 

I mean, what exactly do they have left once they lose the ban?

[BeardswithoutOperators]

When are we expecting Judge McGlynn to proffer a ruling on this?

[Vodoun da Vinci]

Eagerly awaiting PICA being overturned but I'm compromised in the Hope department. Still, my Big Boy Toyz are stored out of State so that I do not legally need to submit an affidavit/register  them or risk being a felon, which is something I abhor. I keep hearing that the gun ban issue (in Illinois or at the Fed level) is on it's last legs but that Hope has yet to make it to my house. Gaad forbid Amerika elects Harris.....We'll likely see PICA (or at least the attempt) at the Federal level.

 

I'm not - so - patiently awaiting getting my 17 round mags legal again for CC and my Big Boy Toyz back in my safe and in my home without affidavit. I'm not holding my breath.

 

VooDoo

Edited October 29, 2024 at 01:50 PM by Vodoun da Vinci
spelling

[crufflesmuth]

If the Protect Illinois Community Act is struck down in Federal Court, the demand will outweigh the capacity to deliver. It will be a boon for most gun shops. I would be careful. During the last "freedom" week police from Lake/Cook County were scouring the former DS Arms Pro Shop. 

 

The possibility McGlynn's injunction survives and prevails against the 7th Circuit is limited at best. It will be interesting

to see what Diane and Frank come up with. The distinguishment between an AR-15 and a fully-automatic M16 

are impossible to miss, even if you never shoot a firearm in your entire life.

 

It is an election year. If Trump wins, this delay tactic will have run its course. 

 

 

[Jeffrey]

I cannot get on board with the thought that we will be limited to the options we may purchase forever.  The ban cannot stand.

[yurimodin]

On 10/28/2024 at 8:01 PM, mab22 said:

It doesn't matter what you say, how you say it, whether you do it in smoke signal, Morse code, sign language, plain English.

You just wont convince some people that they will not stop, until they do it again. Then they anti's will pull another move, and you know what they say?

That'll never happen again, they are done for! 

And then guess what happens.... 🤦‍♂️, and they what do they say? 🤕

 

 

See my tagline: There is only ONE WAY to convince a devout communist that they don't know what is best for you.

[ragsbo]

There are NO negative consequences for the anti so why would they NOT keep passing laws that such as this? Even if they do get beat in courts, they can tie it up for YEARS and screw us over while they use our tax money to fight it. Until they are held accountable this will continue.

[WilsonCQB1911]

If it's possible, could we move the saber rattling and angry rhetoric to a separate thread?  I'm desperately checking for updates on the case and getting post after post about things that aren't updates on how the case is actually progressing. I get the frustration but maybe it's best left to a different thread. 

[TomKoz]

On 10/29/2024 at 5:19 PM, WilsonCQB1911 said:

If it's possible, could we move the saber rattling and angry rhetoric to a separate thread?  I'm desperately checking for updates on the case and getting post after post about things that aren't updates on how the case is actually progressing. I get the frustration but maybe it's best left to a different thread. 

I have attempted to start a new thread.

 

 

[MrTriple]

Please permit me to throw one more thing out there before we move on:

 

We shouldn't forget the herd effect. Oftentimes, support or opposition for a particular issue is solely driven by people who aren't die hards one way or another, but who go with the flow of what's considered socially acceptable at the moment.

 

For them, a big announcement of some sort can drastically alter the perception of what's acceptable in such a way that it leads to wild shifts for or against something, and can blunt the impact of the die hards on one side of an issue or another.

 

Sure, the die hard supporters of gun control might not give up that easily, but they only represent a fraction of the voting public. They still need the support of those who merely back them out of a sense of keeping up appearances. For those folks, they're gonna see "SCOTUS Strikes "assault weapon" Ban" in the newspaper and think, "Huh, guess that's that" without an afterthought. For them, a ban is now a bad thing, and not necessarily because they care one way or another, but because they aren't deep into the weeds and/or don't really care beyond maintaining socially-acceptable opinions.

 

What was the level of support for a handgun ban, last time somebody polled the question? How much of that is due to this herd effect shifting perceptions of acceptability?

[ITguy1686]

On 10/29/2024 at 5:19 PM, WilsonCQB1911 said:

If it's possible, could we move the saber rattling and angry rhetoric to a separate thread?  I'm desperately checking for updates on the case and getting post after post about things that aren't updates on how the case is actually progressing. I get the frustration but maybe it's best left to a different thread. 

Same!!!

Edited October 30, 2024 at 04:01 PM by ITguy1686
typo

[burningspear]

Ditto.

[BeardswithoutOperators]

Still no news?

[Dumak_from_arfcom]

I was hoping it would have dropped on Wednesday and hit the left with a double whammy. 

 

 

[BeardswithoutOperators]

On 11/7/2024 at 2:16 PM, Dumak_from_arfcom said:

I was hoping it would have dropped on Wednesday and hit the left with a double whammy. 

 

 

Yeah me too. Hopefully this will spur the Maryland case or push Judge McGlynn to release his ruling.

 

edit: I could see a demoralized circuit court not trying to fight it (best case) or try to keep the ban up till inauguration next year (worst case).

Edited November 7, 2024 at 09:47 PM by BeardswithoutOperators

[ragsbo]

I am hoping he is taking so long because he wants to write an air tight case for throwing it out. Of course that wouldn't stop the state from going on but could make it harder.

[Dumak_from_arfcom]

On 11/7/2024 at 4:31 PM, ragsbo said:

I am hoping he is taking so long because he wants to write an air tight case for throwing it out. Of course that wouldn't stop the state from going on but could make it harder.

 

What he writes, he is writing for SCOTUS review.  Nothing he writes will win over Uncle Festerbrook or the other activists on the CA7.  CA7 will twist themselves into pretzels to avoid following the Bruen decision.  

[davel501]

On 11/7/2024 at 6:36 PM, Dumak_from_arfcom said:

 

What he writes, he is writing for SCOTUS review.  Nothing he writes will win over Uncle Festerbrook or the other activists on the CA7.  CA7 will twist themselves into pretzels to avoid following the Bruen decision.  

 

Writing for a scotus seat now too.