Uncategorized

In Ezell – Chicago’s New Range Ordinance Doesn’t Moot Case

September 28, 2011 by

Another win for Rhonda Ezell and the team of Alan Gura and David Sigale!

In a decision released today, Judge Virginia Kendall said that despite the rewriting of the Chicago Gun Range Ordinance, it doesn’t moot the case and denied the City of Chicago’s motion to dismiss the case.

Though the Court cannot conclude that the new ordinance is the same as the old without further litigation, as the Supreme Court did in Northeastern Florida, it is consistent with that case not to dismiss the instant litigation as moot and instead to let the parties litigate the issue of whether the new ordinance is a de facto ban on firing ranges or so burdensome as to infringe on Chicagoan’s Second Amendment rights. Moreover, as a practical matter, Ezell is either going to: (1) challenge the constitutionality of these restrictions by filing an amended complaint as part of this case; or (2) file a new case attacking the same restrictions. The Court sees no upside in making the parties start over with another judge who has less familiarity with the issues and facts of the case than this Court.

She then set Friday, September 30th as the deadline for the parties to submit an agreed proposed injunction order or separate proposed injunction orders if they cannot agree. The plaintiffs have until October 15th to submit an amended complaint which her attorneys have indicated they will doing. Finally, she set a status hearing for October 26th.

Uncategorized

Movement In CRPA-NRA Lawsuit Against San Francisco

September 28, 2011 by 4 Comments

Jackson v. City and County of San Francisco was filed back in May of 2009. The suit challenges three San Francisco ordinances on Second Amendment grounds. Yesterday, Judge Richard Seeborg of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California issued a ruling on San Francisco’s Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction. He denied their motion and said the case can move forward.

More on this from attorney Chuck Michel:

On September 27, 2011, Judge Richard Seeborg of the United States District Court, Northern District of California, issued his long awaited ruling on San Francisco’s Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction. Holding that the plaintiffs had “adequately alleged an intent and desire to engage in conduct that is prohibited by the ordinances but which they contend is constitutionally protected,” the court denied the City’s motion. The case, entirely funded by the NRA and CRPA Foundation, can now move forward toward a determination of its merits. The full text of the court’s Order Denying Motion Dismiss for Lack of Standing can be viewed here at www.calgunlaws.com.

The order was issued in Jackson v. City & County of San Francisco, No. 09-2143 (N.D. Cal.). The Jackson lawsuit, filed on May 15, 2009, challenges three San Francisco ordinances on Second Amendment grounds. Specifically, the lawsuit alleges that the City’s enactment and enforcement of three city ordinances requiring firearms be disabled by a trigger lock or stored in a locked container, banning the sale of ammunition that “serves no sporting purpose,” and prohibiting firearm discharges with no self-defense exception unduly burdens the right to self-defense. The Jackson case has already been successful in forcing the City to amend its discharge ban, a law that has been in place for some 73 years, to allow for discharges in self-defense, defense of others, and all other circumstances allowed for under state and federal law.

On February 10, 2011, the City responded to Plaintiffs’ Complaint with a motion to dismiss the case based on its claim that the City does not enforce the challenged ordinances. As such, the City argued, Plaintiffs have no legitimate fear of prosecution and otherwise suffer no injury by complying with the law. The technical claim was that Plaintiffs lack “standing” to bring their claims, based on the dearth of prosecutions to date. In short, the City exposed itself as unconcerned that its ordinances in fact coerce law-abiding citizens to surrender their constitutional right to self-defense.

Plaintiffs responded on March 23, 2011, arguing the City’s motion should be denied. Plaintiffs regarded as unpersuasive the City’s claims that its ordinances are not and have not been enforced and that Plaintiffs suffer no injury by obeying these laws. Ultimately, Plaintiffs asked the court to recognize the very real harm they each suffer by complying with the unconstitutional laws.

The court’s ruling did just that. Plaintiffs laud the decision, upholding reason over rhetoric and recognizing the “immediacy and concreteness of the injury [Plaintiffs] have alleged” and the unreasonableness of requiring a self-defense emergency, or a criminal prosecution, to arise before judicial review of these laws is available. The ruling paves the way for future Second Amendment litigants in the Ninth Circuit.

Uncategorized

Let’s Go To The Audio

September 28, 2011 by 1 Comment

North Carolina Gov. Bev Perdue’s press secretary and her enablers in the press want to pass off her anti-democratic remarks yesterday as some sort of a joke. After listening to the audio recording of her statement, I think she was dead serious when she made that statement about postponing elections for two years.

Again, I have to question the mental capacity of any American politician who would make a statement so blatantly and obviously stupid and irresponsible as well as their fitness to remain in office.

Uncategorized

Nebraska Firearm Owners Assoc. And SAF Sue Omaha

September 28, 2011 by

The lawsuit against Omaha that I alluded to on Twitter from the GRPC has been filed. Pliego Gonzalez v. Omaha attacks the City of Omaha’s prohibition on the registration of a handgun by a legal resident alien.

I’ll have more on the case after I get a chance to read the complaint.

BELLEVUE, WA — The Second Amendment Foundation today filed suit in federal district court in Nebraska against the City of Omaha, challenging the city’s prohibition against anyone who is not a United States citizen from registering a handgun

SAF’s lawsuit, on behalf of Armando Pliego Gonzalez, a resident alien living in the city, is joined by the Nebraska Firearms Owners Association. They are represented by attorneys Bernie Glaser of Lincoln, and David Sigale of Glen Ellyn, IL. Defendants are the City of Omaha, Mayor Jim Suttle and Police Chief Alex Hayes.

Pliego, a member of both SAF and NFOA, has been admitted legally to this country as a resident alien for permanent residence. He was approved as a permanent resident in October 2008. His wife is also a lawful permanent resident, and the couple has four children.

“There are no federal laws requiring U.S. citizenship as a prerequisite for the issuance of a license to purchase, register, carry, transport or even legally conceal a firearm,” noted SAF Executive Vice President and founder Alan M. Gottlieb. “Yet the City of Omaha makes a distinction by prohibiting legal resident aliens from completing the legal requirements to purchase and own a handgun. This prohibition appears to be in conflict with the Second and Fourteenth Amendments, and with the Nebraska State Constitution.”

After his home was invaded and robbed in 2010, Pliego sought to arm himself to defend himself and his family. However, Omaha’s prohibition stands in the way. When he tried to register a handgun that he had legally purchased, the Omaha police denied the application.

“Mr. Pliego jumped through all the hoops, and yet was denied his right of personal protection because of a city municipal code,” Gottlieb stated. “The citizenship requirement in Omaha’s code is an unconstitutional denial of equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment, and the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.

“We’re asking the court for a declaration that the citizenship requirements contained in the Omaha code is unconstitutional,” he concluded.

UPDATE: The JournalStar of Lincoln, NE has more on the lawsuit here.

Uncategorized

Gun Rights Policy Conference – Live Feed From Both Days

September 28, 2011 by 2 Comments

Mark Vanderberg and Doc Wesson of the Gun Rights Radio Network filmed (or more accurately, videoed) both days of the Gun Rights Policy Conference held this past weekend in Chicago. They have taped their live feed and have made it available for those that just could not make it to the conference. This is over 13 hours of video.

For those that are unfamiliar with the Gun Rights Radio Network, it now features approximately 24 podcasts on topics ranging from gun rights to gunsmithing. It includes people such as Michael Bane, Massad Ayoob, Bob Mayne, Doc Wesson, and, of course, the Gun Dudes. It is a voluntary project started by Mark that grew out of his Gun Rights Advocates Podcast. As Mark says, this isn’t about guns, it is about freedom. If you’d like to listen to any of the podcasts or, more importantly, make a donation go to this link. GRRN exists on voluntary subscriptions and donations. It is totally a grassroots effort funded by people like you and me unlike the Joyce Foundation funded gun prohibitionists.

Day One

Day Two

Uncategorized

It Isn’t Just Gun Rights Bev Wants To Suspend

September 27, 2011 by 3 Comments

In what has to be the stupidest political statement of this year or any year, Gov. Beverly Perdue (D-NC) suggested at a Rotary Meeting in Cary that the next Congressional elections be suspended for two years so that “so that Congress can focus on economic recovery and not the next election.”

Her full statement is as follows:

“You have to have more ability from Congress, I think, to work together and to get over the partisan bickering and focus on fixing things. I think we ought to suspend, perhaps, elections for Congress for two years and just tell them we won’t hold it against them, whatever decisions they make, to just let them help this country recover. I really hope that someone can agree with me on that. The one good thing about Raleigh is that for so many years we worked across party lines. It’s a little bit more contentious now but it’s not impossible to try to do what’s right in this state. You want people who don’t worry about the next election.”

Chris Mackey, Perdue’s press secretary, later clarified that she meant it as a joke according to an email sent to The Daily Caller. Some joke.

While I don’t believe Gov. Perdue can be impeached as stupidity isn’t an impeachable offense according to § 123‑5 of the NC General Statutes which details the causes for impeachment, I do question her mental capacity to serve. The North Carolina Constitution speaks to that in Article III, Sec. 3 (4).

Mental incapacity. The mental incapacity of the Governor to perform the duties of his office shall be determined only by joint resolution adopted by a vote of two-thirds of all the members of each house of the General Assembly. Thereafter, the mental capacity of the Governor to perform the duties of his office shall be determined only by joint resolution adopted by a vote of a majority of all the members of each house of the General Assembly. In all cases, the General Assembly shall give the Governor such notice as it may deem proper and shall allow him an opportunity to be heard before a joint session of the General Assembly before it takes final action. When the General Assembly is not in session, the Council of State, a majority of its members concurring, may convene it in extra session for the purpose of proceeding under this paragraph.

That said, we all know the General Assembly isn’t going to a damn thing except huff and puff about it. If I were her opponent in the 2012 General Election, I would keep reminding the voters of that every chance I got so we can send the self-described “the coal miner’s daughter” back to New Bern.

Ace of Spades and Mike Vanderboegh both have some good comments on Perdue’s so-called “idea”.

UPDATE: JammieWearingFool  reports that more criminal charges are expected in an investigation of Bev’s campaign expenses. His suggestion to Bev – Maybe North Carolina’s Democrat Governor Beverly Perdue should suspend her re-election efforts while her campaign is under criminal investigation.

Or maybe she can just declare a statewide State of Emergency and suspend both elections and gun rights.

Uncategorized

United Way Pledges

September 27, 2011 by 4 Comments

Now is about the time that companies start their United Way Campaigns. I know our parent company is really pushing it this year and is looking for 100% participation. They will even match my contribution at 50%.

If you don’t specify an agency, your contribution goes into the UW General Fund and is spread out amongst the recipient agencies. Some of these you may like and some you may not. Some may even be actively working to restrict gun rights.

There is an alternative. You can designate the organization to receive the money. They don’t publicize this much but you can do it. The only requirement is that the organization be a 501(c)3 non-profit.

So how can you combine the United Way with the fight for gun rights? Simple – designate your gift to go to the Second Amendment Foundation. They are a 501(c)3 non-profit and are eligible to receive United Way monies. Their ID number for the United Way is 91-6184-167-501-C3.

It is something to consider.