Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Dingbat? Anti Second Amendment Lurker? Was that directed towards me? If so you are way off base on both. I am about the truth and it seems there is little of that being posted here.

 

Let's try being honest the case referenced was about a divorce. The other cases he filed for Cert with the Supreme Court were about his business dealings. The reason I posted the info and docket number was to show receiving a docket number means very little.

 

Forum members should have all the information before they decide where to donate their hard earned money. I supported this action. Posted about it on other forums. I think the past SCOTUS Petitions should have been mentioned up front. I shouldn't have stumbled across it on another forum through a Google Search. Yes it would have factored into my decision to give this even a second thought.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

not for nuthin', but this is the kind of stuff we need to be seeing. it looks to have been stalled for a bit, but it looks like it's taking tiny forward steps.

 

 now, if only some powerful pro-2a organization would jump onboard and help these guys out. what the hell's the name of that national rifle association again? i'd bet they could help. and if they did, that'd be certain to get cynical people to sign up........

 

 SAPPA dudes........THANKS MAN!!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Zeke said:

Signed; don't let the a holes here get you down. 

It's really the Bholes you have to watch out for. 

Btw: I had the same question as the above. It got a Docket number.. so?  Is that an important milestone or an administrative blip?  Context would have helped. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, voyager9 said:

It's really the Bholes you have to watch out for. 

Btw: I had the same question as the above. It got a Docket number.. so?  Is that an important milestone or an administrative blip?  Context would have helped. 

How is your case coming?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How is your case coming?

Good. Doctor gave me some ointment and said it should clear up in a few weeks as long as I stop picking the scabs off.

Maybe that's a metaphor for my post. Look. All I said is I had the same question.. Never said anything regarding the case or even the recent posts..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Signed it and put the word out to some groups/pages I belong to in social media to help spread the word. I reached out to Adam Kraut (The Gun Collective, This week in guns and running for NRA Board) about this a while back, he said in reality it will be up to the court if they hear the case. I personally believe it will take a lot of noise to maybe get the courts attention and help sway them to hear it if they are on the fence. Maybe if the NRA did back it and start a campaign to support it, it could help. Keep spreading the word and banging that drum!

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many of you have already seen this article which was first posted on Canada Free Press.

This was written by one of SAPPA's founding members.   Please sign the petition which is referenced in this article.

Here is where you can see TPATH's posting of it and where you can download it in PDF.

http://www.tpath.org/two-enemies.html

 

By the way, testing the shoe, usually let's one discover if it fits.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate to be a Debbie Downer but did anyone really expect a different result when Cert was denied the first time? I thought this case was an interesting idea and initially worth the shot, but when Cert was initially denied that should have been the end of it. Then when I saw the history of petitions to SCOTUS something did not seem right. I applaud the initial efforts but after that it was beating a dead horse.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cert denied means what? that the sc won't hear this case? is there anyt feasible appeal possibiulity
That's it. Cert was denied once already. This was a Hail Mary reserved usually for stays of execution. Again Cert was denied. There are no options left.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



  • olight.jpg

    Use Promo Code "NJGF10" for 10% Off Regular Items

  • Supporting Vendors

  • Latest Topics

  • Similar Content

    • By 124gr9mm
      Received this last night.
      Sent a message to all the contact names on the list they provided at the link:
       
       HONEST GUN OWNERS TREATED
      THE SAME AS MURDERERS FOR
      INADVERTENT, TECHNICAL LAW VIOLATIONS   No Violent Crime Required Rot in Jail for Years While Awaiting “Trial”
      Tell Lawmakers to Fix or Oppose This Poorly-Crafted Bill
      On Monday, March 14 at 1:00 p.m., the New Jersey Assembly Law and Public Safety Committee is scheduled to consider A2426 – an apparently well-intentioned but badly botched piece of legislation whose intended purpose appears to be to throw the book at violent gun criminals – which law-abiding gun owners actually support.
        But as written, the bill does not distinguish between violent criminal behavior and innocent technical infractions for the draconian presumption against bail to apply.  Law-abiding gun owners who inadvertently violate NJ’s thicket of hyper-technical firearms possession laws would be treated exactly the same as murderers—thrown in jail to rot for years without bail while they await trial someday for their “crimes.”
      This is not an imagined concern, as the Garden State has a well-documented track record of throwing the book at honest gun owners for innocent technical infractions.  As written, this bill adds insult to injury and would throw honest gun owners in the gulag for years while they await trial for “infractions” like:
      -Stopping for food, fuel, going to the bathroom, or medical treatment on the way to or from the target range.
      -Transporting firearms to or from one’s place of business, a gun store, hunting, fishing, target shooting competitions, target ranges, re-enactments, gun buyback events, vacation homes or other destinations.
      -Widows or widowers turning in firearms of their deceased spouses.
      -Possession of antique and black powder firearms (even these firearms could trigger the draconian penalties under this bill).
      PLEASE IMMEDIATELY CLICK HERE TO EMAIL EVERY ASSEMBLY MEMBER AND TELL THEM TO EITHER FIX OR OPPOSE A2426.  The law should distinguish between MERE POSSESSION of firearms by honest gun owners, vs. MISUSE of firearms by violent gun criminals, and draconian penalties like presumptive denial of bail should only apply to violent criminals who misuse firearms, and not to innocent mistakes of honest gun owners like technical possessory infractions where no violent misconduct is present.  Honest gun owners should not be treated the same as murderers!  Throw the book at the bad guys but take extreme care not to lump the good guys in with the bad.  The bill can easily be amended to make it clear that its penalties apply only to persons accused of violent criminal behavior.
       
       
    • By NJGF
      Judge Kavanaugh and the Second Amendment
      http://www.scotusblog.com/2018/07/judge-kavanaugh-and-the-second-amendment/
      "....Kennedy sided with his more conservative colleagues in finding a Second Amendment right to have a handgun in the home, and there is no reason to believe that Judge Brett Kavanaugh, if confirmed, is likely to disagree"
      "....We know from his recorded dissents from the denial of review that Thomas would vote to review and overturn some existing gun laws, and we know that Gorsuch – at least to some extent – agrees with him. But it takes four votes to grant review in a case, and we do not know whether Roberts and Alito also agree with Thomas but have opted not to say so publicly, or whether they instead are content to leave the court’s gun-rights jurisprudence as it is."
      ".... just this week, the 9th Circuit struck down Hawaii’s ban on carrying weapons openly outside of the home; even if the case goes to the full 9th Circuit, the losing party is almost certain to ask the Supreme Court to weigh in."
    • By NJGF
      Second Amendment challenge to New York state stun gun ban
      https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2016/12/07/second-amendment-challenge-to-new-york-state-stun-gun-ban/?utm_term=.8affecbeea72&wpisrc=nl_volokh&wpmm=1
       
      A law suit was filed that challenges New York's stun gun ban based on second amendment issues.
       
      The filing is here:
      http://14544-presscdn-0-64.pagely.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/New-York-sued-in-federal-court-over-Taser-ban.pdf
       
      The suit cites Heller, McDonald, and the more recent Caetano v. Massachusetts decision.
       
      If NY falls then maybe NJ will be next.
       
    • By NJGF
      Don Kates, the father of the modern Second Amendment revival, has died
       
      https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2016/11/04/don-kates-the-father-of-the-modern-second-amendment-revival-has-died/?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_term=.c54f683896c7
       
      Don wrote “Handgun Prohibition and the Original Meaning of the Second Amendment,” 82 Mich. L. Rev. 204 (1983), the first modern article in a major law review arguing for the individual-rights view of the Second Amendment.
       
    • By JibbaJabba
      http://www.gunssavelife.com/?p=11186
       
       
      Gun confiscation is one step closer in Connecticut. The mainstream media spins it as “one more chance” for non-compliant gun owners who failed to register their scary guns before the January 1 deadline.
       
      In reality, these letters - 106 to rifle owners, and 108 more to residents with standard capacity magazines – are the first step in the Connecticut State Police beginning to round up guns arbitrarily made illegal last year in that state. These guns include America’s favorite rifle, the AR-15 and magazines over 10 rounds, which include the standard capacity magazines made for that America’s favorite rifle.
       
      Failure to register is now a felony now in Connecticut.
       
      How long will it be before there is bloodshed over this law? We’re not sure, but we’re confident it is coming unless the law is rescinded or struck down by the courts.
       
      Mike Vanderboegh of the edgy Sipsey Street Irregulars released an open letter a couple of weeks ago, warning of what’s coming to Connecticut. The Connecticut State Police aren’t listening. Yet.
       
      We suspect attitudes may change after the first few rounds of bloodshed.
       
      As it stands right now, the best estimates are that 4% of newly-regulated guns and magazines in The Nutmeg State have been registered, leaving a hundred thousand or more newly classified potential felons looking over their shoulder.
       
      Editor’s note: We’re not going to link to the article because they are hiding most of the content behind a paywall and we won’t drive thousands of readers to their website.
       
      One more chance for gun owners
       
      Posted: Monday, February 24, 2014 3:35 pm | Updated: 3:36 pm, Mon Feb 24, 2014.
       
      Manchester, CT (Journal Inquirer) – When state officials decided to accept some gun registrations and magazine declarations that arrived after a Jan. 4 deadline, they also had to deal with those applications that didn’t make the cut.
       
      The state now holds signed and notarized letters saying those late applicants own rifles and magazines illegally.
       
      But rather than turn that information over to prosecutors, state officials are giving the gun owners a chance to get rid of the weapons and magazines.
       
      This entry was posted on February 24, 2014 at 5:55 pm and is filed under Blog. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
       
      -------------------------------
      100 letters don't seem like much, but it might be their strategy to tackle a little at a time when it comes to the overall 100k non-compliant gun owners. I'm giving strong consideration to the idea of making future purchases outside state lines.
  • Posts

    • I saw Lara's interview on Bannon's War Room, and that gave me pause for thought. Her conjecture depends primarily on the veracity of her sources. Regardless, if it's not applicable in any way to this ship disaster, the methods described seem valid to me. And worthy of consideration for the future. As I said before, IMO something is coming. Death by a thousand cuts? Lara Logan Provides Comprehensive Baltimore Update: Experts in Behavioral Analytics, Counter-Terrorism, and National Security Analyze Recent Incident | The Gateway Pundit | by Jim Hᴏft
    • Another big windfall for governments'. The 'winner'? Not so much. Mega Millions $1.13 billion winner is facing mega tax bill. The amount is staggering. - nj.com
    • Looking to buy some non-corrosive 7.62x39. I'm located in Bergen County.  Please let me know if you have some at a decent price. 
×
×
  • Create New...