ryan_j

I would actually prefer if they didn't do that. If they enact a law, they moot the case and we start all over again, and they can change it back when the coast is clear. But if we get a court decision, it stands, and it stays forever, unless the US Supreme Court rules otherwise in a future case or we repeal the 2nd Amendment. Besides, Sweeney tweeted today that he would never support CCW.

That's what kwong v Bloomberg is about.

It was reversed and remanded. Make no mistake, "good cause" is dead, at least until it gets re-heard en banc, if it does get re-heard en banc. With the makeup of CA9 it is possible, but the timing of this is perfect for Drake and Pantano. In fact, the San Diego Sheriff has already put up a notice on its webpage saying they are reviewing the decision. They can't just sit around and let status quo reign, because status quo is unconstitutional.

Hell, I live in sussex county, PA is a trip to the grocery store for me.

Kamala Harris is probably crying in her soup tonight.

This is similar to what I tell people about Obamacare and the Supreme Court. The court never really said the penalty was a tax. They said that it could survive as a tax. So I guess they went ahead and changed it to a tax to comply with the court ruling. That's how they should have done it to fully comply with the court ruling. But I suspect that it was a tax from the start anyway, and like the other Obama lies, he tells you what you want to hear for you to feel good.

No no no, what I meant is that the US Supreme Court likes to take cases that resolve circuit splits - meaning the circuit court of appeals are in conflict with each other, so the SCOTUS has to settle it once and for all. They have an opportunity to do it with our case (Drake.)

It's not a sure thing, but it advances the cause for sure. And more importantly, "the heller five" are still on the court. Then nothing changes. NJ remains no/may issue, but I doubt Utah, Pennsylvania or even Connecticut would stop issuing permits, mostly because those other states are pro gun but they also have RKBA in their state constitutions. In other words, we have nothing to lose at this point.

Now with the ruling from CA9, we now have a full sized circuit split, giving the US Supreme Court every reason to hear this case!!!

http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2014/02/12/1056971.pdf Guys, this is HUGE. This creates a massive circuit split which now pretty much compels the US Supreme Court to hear a carry case... it could be Drake, or it could be this one.

Let's cross that bridge if/when we reach it. Right now the hurdle is getting the court to hear the case. If/when they give a favorable decision we can decide from there. Remember that Illinois had its ban struck down. They could have gone with a restrictive law like NJ's but their pro gun reps fought hard for a SHALL issue bill. It's not perfect, hell it's not even reasonable, but it's much better than what they had before. Besides, once justifiable need is gone, the existing process should still apply. The legislature CAN choose to write a new law but they don't have to. And if they do, expect Allison McHose, Mike Carroll and the rest to come out in full force for us, as long as we still support them.

Looks like NJGF doesn't like attachments over 110kb. Here they are in my dropbox: https://www.dropbox.com/l/bTy4fGYlBFprFHhT2xYGEe Happy reading.

More amicus briefs! I will try to post them all. Let's see if the forum cooperates.

I will second the recommendation for Hill Country. They even received a commendation from Rick Perry. I've been there quite a few times. I regret going there because I pack on the pounds afterwards.

NRA has always been helping through the state affiliate (ANJRPC).

Yep, but do you use Comic Sans at all when you want to be taken seriously? Usually they use Gothic?

Comic sans is a font. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comic_Sans_MS

Amicus brief from CATO. I can't believe they are actually serious. Did they seriously use Comic Sans? http://www.scribd.com/doc/206565379/Drake-Brief

Some are pushing for that already. Read Mark Levin's "the liberty amendments." I think a CC would be a good thing to have. At least it lets us hash it out instead of preparing. And then we can decide what to do afterwards.

Yep that's the one. They have a lot of good deals.

There was a gun shop in PA called General Defense OUtfitters (GDO) that was arranging a group buy of the wise food products.

If we reach that point, then the country is completely f-ed. I mean much worse than now. I doubt we will see a state like Utah for example outlawing CCW.

Even if they refuse to strike down justifiable need, all we end up with is status quo. I doubt, Florida, Utah, Texas, Georgia and the other free states will ban CCW as a result of the court.

I use the 5 gallon poly cans. Just keep them full, do not vent them and use stabilizer. I use Sta-Bil marine formula. You need to be mindful about two things - oxidation and moisture. Keeping as little air inside the container helps slow both of those things. I keep 30 gallons plus the generator (4.5 gallons). I can go non-stop for 24 hours on 10 gallons. Realistically in a multi-day outage I'll keep my generator on about 4-8 hours. After Sandy I avoided the gas lines by going to different gas stations, some out of state. I paid more in PA and NY with their high gas tax but at least I was still able to get it!

There is a bill in the NJ legislature called the "citizens protection act" sponsored by Mike Carroll and others which basically streamlines our law for carry permits and makes it more like Florida or Utah. If one of these cases results in a favorable decision, my opinion is that the legislature should see the writing on the wall and pass that bill. And CC should sign it to show that he's capable of making bridges, not just closing lanes on them.