SAPPA

Second Amendment Preservation and Protection Act (SAPPA)

928 posts in this topic

Copied from Facebook.

 

 

"Everyone ! Everyone ! Spread The WORD..

 

Nick Purpura's case, or shall I say his filing for his case to be Re-Heard for cert, was granted....and now is DISTRIBUTED for Conference for January 5th 2018.....this doesn't mean it was granted Cert. it just means they will ( look at his case "again") to see if they should great Cert. This ""COULD"" be big news...Stay turned.... If possible we need to support Purpura, Not sure how, but if anyone has Ideas, lets hear them. letters to the SCOTUS asking them grant Cert? IDK but he needs HELP...maybe somehow we can get the 23 A.G. from the state like want HR38 to pass to file a amicus brief...( Jay Factor ) Case Numbers: (16-3173) Docket #17-280"

 

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Copied from Facebook.

 

 

"Everyone ! Everyone ! Spread The WORD..

 

Nick Purpura's case, or shall I say his filing for his case to be Re-Heard for cert, was granted....and now is DISTRIBUTED for Conference for January 5th 2018.....this doesn't mean it was granted Cert. it just means they will ( look at his case "again") to see if they should great Cert. This ""COULD"" be big news...Stay turned.... If possible we need to support Purpura, Not sure how, but if anyone has Ideas, lets hear them. letters to the SCOTUS asking them grant Cert? IDK but he needs HELP...maybe somehow we can get the 23 A.G. from the state like want HR38 to pass to file a amicus brief...( Jay Factor ) Case Numbers: (16-3173) Docket #17-280"

 

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

 

I wouldn't expect a different result.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DeerSlayer said:

Copied from Facebook.

 

 

"Everyone ! Everyone ! Spread The WORD..

 

Nick Purpura's case, or shall I say his filing for his case to be Re-Heard for cert, was granted....and now is DISTRIBUTED for Conference for January 5th 2018.....this doesn't mean it was granted Cert. it just means they will ( look at his case "again") to see if they should great Cert. This ""COULD"" be big news...Stay turned.... If possible we need to support Purpura, Not sure how, but if anyone has Ideas, lets hear them. letters to the SCOTUS asking them grant Cert? IDK but he needs HELP...maybe somehow we can get the 23 A.G. from the state like want HR38 to pass to file a amicus brief...( Jay Factor ) Case Numbers: (16-3173) Docket #17-280"

 

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

Personally I would love to see a comeuppance for the state by way of a SCOTUS ruling. But, does SCOTUS even entertain letters/appeals from people? No offense intended, but I don't feel comfortable with the highest court in the land bowing to public pressure. The reason, and I think it's a good one, is that the pendulum swings both ways. Case in point, when the Senate changed the rules under Reid to pass Obama care. Now every time there's a critical vote that the R's really want, that specter rears it's ugly head. There are severe consequences to changing long standing tradition. I want my 2nd amendment rights restored here, but I want my Supreme Court to be completely impartial and originalist. Again, that sort of thing can backfire in a heartbeat.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, capt14k said:

 


I wouldn't expect a different result.

http://thefogbow.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=934543


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Capt14K,

I've been somewhat skeptical of SAPPA's action and legal writings since I first became aware of them, but I do believe their goal is to help the RKBA cause in NJ, so I don't go out of my way to disparage their efforts.

That bulletin board you linked above seems to be very anti-Trump/anti-RKBA in general, so I'm not surprised that they're taking any and every opportunity to take shots at the SAPPA action.

Maybe Purpura is a crackpot, maybe he isn't, but since his efforts seem to be aimed at increasing gun rights in NJ, perhaps you could stop trying to diminish him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Capt14K,

 

I've been somewhat skeptical of SAPPA's action and legal writings since I first became aware of them, but I do believe their goal is to help the RKBA cause in NJ, so I don't go out of my way to disparage their efforts.

 

That bulletin board you linked above seems to be very anti-Trump/anti-RKBA in general, so I'm not surprised that they're taking any and every opportunity to take shots at the SAPPA action.

 

Maybe Purpura is a crackpot, maybe he isn't, but since his efforts seem to be aimed at increasing gun rights in NJ, perhaps you could stop trying to diminish him.

Actually I didn't read the bulletin board just the last post that mentioned what was happening with the SCOTUS link. No clue as to what the site is, it was the first Google search result.

 

Fred2 posted the direct SCOTUS link so I removed the link I had.

 

With that being said I have lost all faith in this action. I supported it at first. Now I think it is either a money grab or insanity. Either way it is DOA.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have to support the SAPPA guys.
If this gets heard, it could blow NJ's laws out of the water.
I understand the feeling. My advice is don't waste your money. He just reapplied and they will simply deny again. If they don't deny I will donate myself. This will be the 5th or 6th time Peruta has filed with SCOTUS. He also filed as a birther.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Forgive me but I'm new to this Peruta case.  But I Googled him (link below) and this reads that he was never denied carry and is basing his case on "what if" this happens and "what if" that happens.  Am I behind or has he since been denied?  Has he since been detained or arrested for a silly NJ gun law?  I hope so.  Because you can't have a case on "what if".  Can someone clear this up for me?  Has he experienced more than "what if"?

https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca3/16-3173/16-3173-2017-04-19.html

  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can't stop picking at it, can you?  BTW, his name is Nick PURPURA, not Peruta.

 

My mistake Peruta was the one in California that had standing but was denied Cert due to Kennedy not retiring.  

 

 

Yes that forum was left wing, but they have a very detailed history of his history with SCOTUS. Have you read through any of it?

 

 

 

If there wasn’t something there, even if small, then why would they grant permission to re-hear arguments for cert? They already denied it, so why would they agree to relook?

 

It's just part of the process. They aren't hearing any new arguments. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
any update on this,  Jan 5th to rehear the case for cert?
 
  Thanks
I didn't see it on the official .gov docket for today, but on the summary of the case it was listed for today. It was listed as being on the docket today on a third party site and not listed on another 3rd party site. Regardless nothing has changed with SCOTUS that makes me think the outcome will be any different.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
they give a reason why not? i'm not surprised to be honest.
Because they denied it once already and nothing changed between the denials?

I assume this horse is officially dead? Maybe now we can expend funds on a lawsuit that actually has a shot at being heard by SCOTUS and being decided in our favor.

I will admit I found this suit interesting at first but it seems to me Mr Purpura is a serial frivolous litigant.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now



  • Latest Topics

  • Similar Content

    • 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.
    • By Kerouac32
      http://m.cbsnews.com/storysynopsis.rbml?&pageType=sundaymorning&catid=57566014&feed_id=35&nb_splitPage=3
       
      I think this is the most chilling part:
      "This is our country. We live in it, and we have a right to the kind of country we want. We would not allow the French or the United Nations to rule us, and neither should we allow people who died over two centuries ago and knew nothing of our country as it exists today."
      Honestly it's a bit interesting he mentioned the UN who I'm pretty sure the president is alright with handing over rights to.
    • By ChrisJM981
      After looking through all the bills in the Senate Law and Public Safety I compiled a list of proposed bills for the 2012-2013 Legislative Session that affect firearm owners in NJ. I believe all are just renumbered for the new Legislative Session.
       
      Support:
       
      S104 Revises procedures for securing a permit to carry a handgun.
      Law and Public Safety
      http://www.njleg.sta...0500/104_I1.PDF
       
      Cardinale, Gerald as Primary Sponsor
      Oroho, Steven V. as Primary Sponsor
      Bucco, Anthony R. as Co-Sponsor
      1/10/2012 Introduced in the Senate, Referred to Senate Law and Public Safety Committee
       
       
      S269 Revises procedures for securing a permit to carry a handgun.
      http://www.njleg.sta...0500/269_I1.PDF
       
      Doherty, Michael J. as Primary Sponsor
      O'Toole, Kevin J. as Primary Sponsor
      Oroho, Steven V. as Co-Sponsor
      Bucco, Anthony R. as Co-Sponsor
      1/10/2012 Introduced in the Senate, Referred to Senate Law and Public Safety Committee
       
       
      S707 The "New Jersey Right to Home Defense Law."
      http://www.njleg.sta...1000/707_I1.PDF
       
      O'Toole, Kevin J. as Primary Sponsor
      Bucco, Anthony R. as Co-Sponsor
      1/10/2012 Introduced in the Senate, Referred to Senate Law and Public Safety Committee
       
       
      S1627 Eliminates prohibition against purchasing more than one handgun in calendar month.
      http://www.njleg.sta...000/1627_I1.PDF
       
      Oroho, Steven V. as Primary Sponsor
      Doherty, Michael J. as Co-Sponsor
      2/16/2012 Introduced in the Senate, Referred to Senate Law and Public Safety Committee
       
       
      S1737 Provides two-year window for persons to transfer, render inoperable or surrender assault firearm.
      http://www.njleg.sta...000/1737_I1.PDF
       
      Bucco, Anthony R. as Primary Sponsor
      3/5/2012 Introduced in the Senate, Referred to Senate Law and Public Safety Committee
       
       
      Fight:
       
      S419 Revises qualifications and requirements for permits to carry handgun; establishes annual fee of $100.
      Law and Public Safety
      http://www.njleg.sta...0500/419_I1.PDF
       
      Van Drew, Jeff as Primary Sponsor
      1/10/2012 Introduced in the Senate, Referred to Senate Law and Public Safety Committee
       
       
      S657 Requires proof of firearms safety training as a condition for issuance of firearms purchaser ID cards and permits to purchase handguns.
      http://www.njleg.sta...1000/657_I1.PDF
       
      Stack, Brian P. as Primary Sponsor
      Cunningham, Sandra B. as Primary Sponsor
      1/10/2012 Introduced in the Senate, Referred to Senate Law and Public Safety Committee
       
       
      S810 Clarifies that "airsoft" guns are firearms
      http://www.njleg.sta...1000/810_I1.PDF
       
      Smith, Bob as Primary Sponsor
      Scutari, Nicholas P. as Co-Sponsor
      1/10/2012 Introduced in the Senate, Referred to Senate Law and Public Safety Committee
       
      S1278 Establishes "gun-free" and "weapon free" zones around certain school and public properties.
      http://www.njleg.sta...500/1278_I1.PDF
       
      Turner, Shirley K. as Primary Sponsor
      1/30/2012 Introduced in the Senate, Referred to Senate Law and Public Safety Committee
       
       
      S1705 Permits municipalities to establish weapons free zones around schools and public facilities
      http://www.njleg.sta...000/1705_I1.PDF
       
      Rice, Ronald L. as Primary Sponsor
      2/27/2012 Introduced in the Senate, Referred to Senate Law and Public Safety Committee
       
       
      S2178 Revises definition of destructive device to include certain weapons of 50 caliber or greater
      http://www.njleg.sta...500/2178_I1.PDF
       
      Lesniak, Raymond J. as Primary Sponsor
      9/20/2012 Introduced in the Senate, Referred to Senate Law and Public Safety Committee
  • Posts

  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.