For Illinois folks...you can buy ARs & LCMs again-for short time anyways

davidmcbeth3 wrote: ↑

Thu. May. 11, 2023 9:03 pm

Not that I know of ... Grumpy's excited

I am ?

grumpy wrote: ↑

Thu. May. 11, 2023 9:15 pm

I am ?

You are. lol

grumpy wrote: ↑

Thu. May. 11, 2023 9:01 pm

Any update?

The latest is,.... the case is back to SCOTUS with Justise Barret and waiting to see what she does next. There are actually two similar cases in Illinois, and they are both likely to go before the full court in a few months as this all works its way through the system of the long, slow appeals process of the lower federal courts.

Paul

In another slap to gun control, two days ago, a Fed judge shot down the restriction on 18-year-olds to buy a handgun as unconstitutional. It discusses "infringment", which is something I wish SCOTUS would finally clarify once and for all.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscou ... 47.0_1.pdf

Paul

Sunny Boy wrote: ↑

Fri. May. 12, 2023 8:22 am

In another slap to gun control, two days ago, a Fed judge shot down the restriction on 18-year-olds to buy a handgun as unconstitutional. It discusses "infringment", which is something I wish SCOTUS would finally clarify once and for all.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscou ... 47.0_1.pdf

Paul

Infringement

INFRINGEMENT, noun infrinj'ment. Act of violating; breach; violation; non-fulfillment; as the infringement of a treaty, compact or other agreement; the infringement of a law or constitution.

^^ definition of infringement , 1828 Webster American Dictionary
https://webstersdictionary1828.com/Dictionary/Infringement


When looking at a law one looks to see if the legislative body's legislation itself defines it. If not, the dictionary definition is what usually prevails; one from the time the legislature's generation's time period.

One does not need SCOTUS to read from a dictionary (well, DEMs do, but not people with functioning brains).

Even if SCOTUS said the word infringement meant what the dictionary says, people will still say its wrong.

All adults have the same rights, unless the constitution says otherwise. 18 is an adult.
(I could have written the brief in this case - it would have been 5 pages)

Today's update. The 7th circus court has pushed the schedule up, so we may be seeing results happening sooner than the usual snail's pace.

Bad news is the 7th is upholding the ban law for now.

Good news is the 7th's motions may be more likely to push this to SCOTUS where the ban law is more likely to be overturned.



Paul

Sunny Boy wrote: ↑

Fri. May. 12, 2023 6:10 pm

Today's update. The 7th circus court has pushed the schedule up, so we may be seeing results happening sooner than the usual snail's pace.

Bad news is the 7th is upholding the ban law for now.

Good news is the 7th's motions may be more likely to push this to SCOTUS where the ban law is more likely to be overturned.



Paul

I listened to this prior to your post..it does not add much beyond the previous video of his, linked earlier in this thread.

We are at a wait and see stage for SCOTUS' decision to snatch the case from the 7th. Given that ILL is looking to arrest people who bought guns and mags for possessing those guns legally purchased (the state is not saying that people purchased them illegally, just that they now possess them illegally--its retarded yes but that the view of ILL...many sheriffs have already said that they will not enforce the law for these folks who bought stuff during this freedom week). The state has zero chance of winning this case. The state has declared war on its own people (in the spring of 1775 the British wanted to take people's guns, it is what started the war).

Me? Since the Heller I case, my position has been to void all gun laws and find anyone charged with a crime relating to a gun law to have my vote as a member of a jury to be "not guilty" regardless of the crime committed. So a crime of "assault" is not an issue but "assault with a firearm" results in not guilty.

Believe me, the gov't does not like citizens talking about "jury nullification".

The scotus ruled today on Illinois, but for now…

Good catch Grumpy.

SCOTUS did not decide to snatch the case from the 7th circuit.

The 7th circuit appellate court scheduled hearings in the matter for June I think.

So the application had a good effect - kicking the 7th to move quickly on the matter.

The anit-gunners think that this is a win. LOL

FUDDS no need to look at

For folks in Pennsesywhaterver