And another
3 Responses to “And another”
Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.
Uncle Pays the Bills
 |
|
Find Local
|
Categories
- ATF (769)
- Death Match (10)
- Eminent Domain (225)
- In the bag (9)
- Notes to Junior (546)
- Poker (74)
- Recipes (142)
- Shotgun Noob (11)
- The Airing of Grievances (19)
- uncategorized (47,725)
June 28th, 2008 at 1:30 pm
There will be a lot of this. These gun-haters who have held sway in various enclaves where the Constitution means nothing will now put their gun-grabs and gun bans “on hold”, hoping that such action will let them bide their time until Heller “blows over”.
Don’t let these scofflaws get away with it. File petitions, demand recalls for failing to actually REPEAL these unconstitutional regulations.
Until every last one of these laws is actually expunged from the codes of law, they can still be used against citizens. Believe me, you don’t want to have to go to Federal Court to try to get a local weapons charge removed from your record. That’s a good way to go bankrupt.
Dig out the codebooks, sort out the Heller-forbidden regulations, and DEMAND that they be actually repealed by the same legislative bodies which put them there in the first place. When your demands are NOT met, and few will be, prepare to form organizations to sue those jurisdictions. Remember that the lowest-ranking State magistrate can declare any local or State code unconstitutional, and when a Judge enjoins enforcement, then that code cannot be enforced. When a Chief of Police or Mayor says enforcement is “on hold”, never forget that just as quickly, it can be “off hold”.
June 28th, 2008 at 3:25 pm
Could be interesting.
If it weren’t for facing the 9th clown circus, I would consider challenging the WA MG ban. Too long of a set of odds … can’t count on drawing Kozinski.
I there a similar MG ban in a more conservative circuit court’s jurisdiction?
June 28th, 2008 at 4:23 pm
Here’s my take on Willmette’s moratorium on enforcing the law. It is illegal. If the law is on the books, it should be enforced.
I don’t agree with the enforcement of such laws, but by declaring a moratorium instead of repealing the law Willmette may just have given the courts an excuse to deny petition of redress due to lack of standing as no one is now being harmed by this illegal law. Meanwhile Willmette gets to keep the law, ready for reactivation at the first sign of a sympathetic ruling anywhere in the country.
Therefore, it appears to me that the first thing that now must be done is to get Wilmette in court to answer for selective enforcement of the law, before any challenge to the law itself can be successfully mounted in court.
Could Wilmette declare a moratorium on enforcing the laws against murder, rape, speeding, or other laws? Of course not. If the law in question is not worthy of enforcement that law is not worthy of existence.
By doing what they have done they have added another whole layer of litigation to the battle and possibly many years of time before they must answer for the basic question.
The moratorium is immoral, but elegant in its evil machinations.
This is not to be confuse with retreat, they are just attacking in another direction, much like the Marine 1st Division at Chosin Reservoir , only without the honor.