Beware of this man

[RIjake]

K

[Another_David]

EDIT: You now state that the $160 was paid to the court, so this man isn't practicing law.

I'm done here.

[theGringo]

Is this man a lawyer?

If not charging you for legal advice without a license is illegal and it's not something the something the legal community takes lightly.

If he is a lawyer then file a complaint with the RI bar association.

I guess either way you should contact the RI bar association on Tuesday.

You beat me to it, AD. I had to read and reread this post to make sense of it (I still really can't, it's so poorly constructed) but the essential question is ... did RIjake hire a lawyer, or give a hunnerd-sixty to ... some guy.

I can hardly wait to hear ... the rest of the story. [wink]

[jdubois]

[popcorn] .

[RIjake]

Sorry if this was hard to understand, I didn't think it was poorly constructed but whatever..........

No he's not a lawyer, he's some sort of businessman and gun owner who put this CRALRI.org together. The $160 fee was the state fee for filing a lawsuit.
There is a lawyer in Boston who he hires to do the legal work. I never spoke directly with the actual lawyer.

[highlander]

Sounds shifty to me. This guy has a "lawyer" and your paying only $160,the bells in my head would be ringing off the walls. Sounds like a case for Judge Judy.

[Scrivener]

No he's not a lawyer, he's some sort of businessman and gun owner who put this CRALRI.org together. The $160 fee was the state fee for filing a lawsuit.

There is a lawyer in Boston who he hires to do the legal work. I never spoke directly with the actual lawyer.

File under TSTL......... [rolleyes]


Just out of idle curiosity, did you think the minimal amount necessary to check with the COURT?

[RIjake]

File under TSTL......... [rolleyes]


Just out of idle curiosity, did you think the minimal amount necessary to check with the COURT?

OK, so if GOAL said they were going to represent you in court you'd think it was a scam? I met with this guy a couple times along with six other Rhode Islanders who were denied an application for a town issued permit.

You mind rephrasing your second question? I don't know what you're asking, the check I wrote was to the courts for the filing fee, not to Archer.

Let's keep the sarcasm to a minimum here guys

[Cross-X]

OK, so if GOAL said they were going to represent you in court you'd think it was a scam? I met with this guy a couple times along with six other Rhode Islanders who were denied an application for a town issued permit.

You mind rephrasing your second question? I don't know what you're asking, the check I wrote was to the courts for the filing fee, not to Archer.

Let's keep the sarcasm to a minimum here guys

GOAL does many things for the membership, but attempting to play lawyer in court isn't one of them.

Try again for an analogy that makes sense. [wink]

[RIjake]

GOAL does many things for the membership, but attempting to play lawyer in court isn't one of them.

Try again for an analogy that makes sense. [wink]

OMG you people are unreal. He's NOT playing lawyer.

Whatever. The take home message here is just what the title of the thread is BEWARE OF THIS MAN. That's all.

Out.

[Scrivener]

OK, so if GOAL said they were going to represent you in court you'd think it was a scam? I met with this guy a couple times along with six other Rhode Islanders who were denied an application for a town issued permit.

IF - again, if - GOAL promised to represent me, I would expect to actually meet with its attorney. You know, the one who is supposedly representing me.

You did no such thing.


You mind rephrasing your second question? I don't know what you're asking, the check I wrote was to the courts for the filing fee, not to Archer.

In which case, my question is not merely clear, but obvious: Did you manifest sufficient intelligence to actually inquire of the clerk of court to see if the action you paid the filing fee for was, in fact, ever filed? [rolleyes]

[Ray-500]

OMG you people are unreal. He's NOT playing lawyer.

Whatever. The take home message here is just what the title of the thread is BEWARE OF THIS MAN. That's all.

Out.

Not trying to be offensive or contrary, but what is it that you actually paid him for? What is it that he said he would ACTUALLY do for you? What did he promise you?

[Radio]

Unfortunately for him, I think he "Got what he paid for"

[Ray-500]

Unfortunately for him, I think he "Got what he paid for"

Given the amount of scams going on today, that is probably very true. Grin, the "snake oil salesman" is alive and well....and thriving. [grin]

[Cross-X]

what's he, some sort of courthouse fixer???

[Scrivener]

Well - it is Rhode Island....... [wink]

[Ray-500]

Well - it is Rhode Island....... [wink]

Yeah....tell me about it ! Scams galore, but I guess we're not alone in that regard. [grin]

[RIjake]

Boy you guys are ruthless[smile]

Let me clarify a couple things.

1) The lawsuit was filed. It was the intent of the suit to force the COP to issue an application. RI state law allows for two ways to get a LTC. One is through the AG the other is through the COP. The differences are that the town issue license has no restrictions and has no cool off period for a handgun purchase. The AG is 7 days. Basically RI Chiefs that don't issue applications are shirking their responsibility. I'm guessing that they feel there's some sort of liability or they're to lazy.

2) My comparison to GOAL was that both organizations (GOAL and CRAL) offer litigation assistance. CRAL is listed on THIS site as THE Rhode Island gun owners organization and this guy is the owner of it! NO offense was implied or intended against GOAL. I merely wanted to give you folk from Mass something to compare CRAL to.

I did get what I paid for.......the lawsuit was filed. Archer claimed his org was going to cover the attorney fees and they were going to represent me in court to force the COP to issue and review the application. I guess that I should have met with the attorney. But since he was paying for it, it never got that far.

What I think happened was, and I don't have any proof, the details of my particular case were getting complicated and Archer and the attorney felt like he didn't want to spend the money to fight it. Initially he thought we had an airtight case but after he got more involved I think he realized it wasn't as easy as he thought. This is just my opinion of what went down.

I just wish the guy have given me the common courtesy to return my phone calls.

I sense that you boys are getting a good chuckle out of all this and you have made up your mind that I was scammed. I really don't think it was a scam. I think that this Archer character is trying to be something (a state organization here to "protect" gun owners rights) that he has no experience or
aptitude to be.

This thread has got over 500 views and about 10 different people have felt it was necessary to reply with sarcastic remarks and not much in the way of anything constructive. Hopefully the rest of those that have read this have digested the facts and understand that if you advertise yourself as a defender of gun owner's rights it takes more than a website and big talk to actually deliver.

Maybe I did get what I deserve. All I was trying to do was legally force the COP in my town to do his duty and issue and application. He's the only one who's happy so far 'cause I still don't have an application.

[theGringo]

This thread has got over 500 views and about 10 different people have felt it was necessary to reply with sarcastic remarks and not much in the way of anything constructive. Hopefully the rest of those that have read this have digested the facts and understand that if you advertise yourself as a defender of gun owner's rights it takes more than a website and big talk to actually deliver.


So was one of those 500 views this Archer guy, and so you just got a call from him because he's worried about an open carry pig roast at his office?



Maybe I did get what I deserve. All I was trying to do was legally force the COP in my town to do his duty and issue and application. He's the only one who's happy so far 'cause I still don't have an application.

Well, you probably "deserve" better than what you've got so far even if your story sets my mind to replaying the theme music from "Fractured Fairy Tales".

I hope you find a way through this, but I'm still waiting for the .... rest of the story.

[RIjake]

So was one of those 500 views this Archer guy, and so you just got a call from him because he's worried about an open carry pig roast at his office?


Well, you probably "deserve" better than what you've got so far even if your story sets my mind to replaying the theme music from "Fractured Fairy Tales".

I hope you find a way through this, but I'm still waiting for the .... rest of the story.

[rolleyes]

[goofycj7]

Boy you guys are ruthless[smile]

Let me clarify a couple things.

1) The lawsuit was filed. It was the intent of the suit to force the COP to issue an application. RI state law allows for two ways to get a LTC. One is through the AG the other is through the COP. The differences are that the town issue license has no restrictions and has no cool off period for a handgun purchase. The AG is 7 days. Basically RI Chiefs that don't issue applications are shirking their responsibility. I'm guessing that they feel there's some sort of liability or they're to lazy.

2) My comparison to GOAL was that both organizations (GOAL and CRAL) offer litigation assistance. CRAL is listed on THIS site as THE Rhode Island gun owners organization and this guy is the owner of it! NO offense was implied or intended against GOAL. I merely wanted to give you folk from Mass something to compare CRAL to.

I did get what I paid for.......the lawsuit was filed. Archer claimed his org was going to cover the attorney fees and they were going to represent me in court to force the COP to issue and review the application. I guess that I should have met with the attorney. But since he was paying for it, it never got that far.

What I think happened was, and I don't have any proof, the details of my particular case were getting complicated and Archer and the attorney felt like he didn't want to spend the money to fight it. Initially he thought we had an airtight case but after he got more involved I think he realized it wasn't as easy as he thought. This is just my opinion of what went down.

I just wish the guy have given me the common courtesy to return my phone calls.

I sense that you boys are getting a good chuckle out of all this and you have made up your mind that I was scammed. I really don't think it was a scam. I think that this Archer character is trying to be something (a state organization here to "protect" gun owners rights) that he has no experience or
aptitude to be.

This thread has got over 500 views and about 10 different people have felt it was necessary to reply with sarcastic remarks and not much in the way of anything constructive. Hopefully the rest of those that have read this have digested the facts and understand that if you advertise yourself as a defender of gun owner's rights it takes more than a website and big talk to actually deliver.

Maybe I did get what I deserve. All I was trying to do was legally force the COP in my town to do his duty and issue and application. He's the only one who's happy so far 'cause I still don't have an application.

What made the case not "air tight"?
If CRAL did attempt to go through with this then they did what they said they would.
Except have the decency to tell you what happened when things went south which probably would have helped if you got a lawyer right away.

[Scrivener]

How could the case possibly go forward without you ever being in contact with the attorney, still less actually appearing in court?

Were you really so obtuse as to think handing it off to a legally irrelevant third party would actually accomplish something? [rolleyes]

[Ray-500]

RIjake, there still seems to be a lot of loose ends...unless I am greatly misunderstanding something. Wouldn't be the first time. [grin]

A suit has been filed...by you? If the meeting with the attorney never took place, who is actually, legally pursuing this? Going back to the root, what did this guy/business actually promise to deliver to you?

Not trying to be offensive or contrary....perhaps its my own lack of understanding....but you very clearly stated that folks should STAY AWAY from this guy. Was that a mistaken comment?

[TomH]

No fee of $160 is going to pay for a lawyer to represent you. I'd hire a real lawyer, and since you're already filed take it up from there and forget that lame organization.

[TonyDedo]

Guys, I think we're all coming down a little too hard on RIjake. I know the "Beware of this man" title got everyone thinking "scam," and maybe RIjake didn't do a good enough job of explaining himself.

Regardless, it seems to me that RIjake wanted to file a suit, and the RI version of GOAL offered to assist him. Apparently it worked to a certain extent, because the suit got filed. Now, from here on in I'm sure we're only getting one very biased side of the story, and I'm sure there is a lot being left out. But by hook or by crook the CRAL decided it didn't want to continue to pursue the suit, jumped ship, and RIjake is pissed off about it.

Personally, I'd like to get the other side of the story. As RIjake mentioned, the CRAL is endorsed by this website. Prior to this post, I would have encouraged any RI gunowner to contribute to CRAL the same way we encourage MA gun owners to contribute to GOAL. But if the CRAL is shirking its duties, I think we should know about it.

Had anyone else had experience with the CRAL, or is anyone authorized to speak on their behalf?

[TonyDedo]

And lets let go of the $160 dollar thing - it was a filing fee, not an attorney fee, and RIjake was clear about that from the beginning.

[TimJ]

I e-mailed Jim from CRAL, hopefully he'll respond.

I've known Jim for years, I'm sure his side of the story will clear things up.

[Scrivener]

And lets let go of the $160 dollar thing - it was a filing fee, not an attorney fee, and RIjake was clear about that from the beginning.

True. It was everything else that was not clear.

Such as, who actually FILED the appeal, who prepared and signed it and what happened after it was filed.

[derek]

I e-mailed Jim from CRAL, hopefully he'll respond.
I'm sure his side of the story will clear things up.

+1

[WILDCATT]

what is this "CRAL" why did you not go to the R.I. ass.
they are the state reps.PERRY WHEELER is a lawyer with big cagones.
the # is 401-781-2773.he reps the state ass in the legislature.[rolleyes]

[jdubois]

he reps the state ass in the legislature.[rolleyes]

Can you actually say stuff like that here? [shocked]

[derek]

I have to admit I have no idea what the sentence means.

[jdubois]

I have to admit I have no idea what the sentence means.

Me neither, but it sounds like it might hurt...

[Timbob1]

I'm not sure we have all the facts. From what I know, there was a class action lawsuit pending, but one of the requirements was to apply to the CLEO and be denied first, then appeal in a class action setting.
That was how it was explained to me anyways.
I haven't had any real interaction with Mr. Archer, however he has been fairly rude to me with some comments when I inquired about the progress of the above suit, but who knows, maybe he was having a bad day.

I think we need more facts, from both sides to determine what is really going on here.

Tim

[Uncle Fester]

I've met Jim a few times, he's a decent guy that has his stuff together. CRAL is like GOAL in that is an organization who's objective is protecting firearms owners rights in RI. It is unlike GOAL in that there are no paid members. If Jim is going to cover legal fees for somebody, he's either going to get the money from the NRA, find pro bono legal representation, or pay for it himself. CRAL doesn't have a legal team, a board, or interns, it has Jim Archer, and a bunch of guys that post on his message board, asking for assitance with obtaining a license to carry in RI. When he started, there were no towns that would issue permits (unless you knew somebody), now there are 15 towns that are "shall issue". Some of this was done with lawsuits, some at town council meetings, and some by meeting with local police chiefs. He's a very busy guy, he's got a full time job, is very active in local politics, and single handedly runs Rhode Island's only local gun rights organization. Maybe he should have returned you calls, but we don't have the whole story. I think you might want to cut the guy some slack.

[Uncle Fester]

I'm going to assume you're RIjake on CRAL's board too. Judging by your original request for help in obtaining a license in RI, you did everything Jim told you not to do at the beginning of the process.

Here's a link to the thread to refresh your memory.

http://forum.cralri.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=2577&st=0&sk=t&sd=a

Are you sure you were banned from that board? It doesn't say anything in your profile about being banned.

[Timbob1]

Actually, from what I read, it doesn't seem that RIJake was malicious in his intent, just rushing the gun on things before getting proper advice. It certainly doesn't mean he deliberately disregarded anyone's advice, it appears based on the small fragment of what was provided, that he was impatient.

There were a bunch of people giving their opinions on that board, and it sounds as if he realized after the fact that he might have made a mistake in his impatient actions, but I still don't have all the facts.

It's difficult to judge peoples personalities based on what they post on a blog or message board, and I am one to give someone the benefit of the doubt based on that, so let's have some more info. Anyone got anything?

Perhaps Mr. Archer himself could give his side, we could certainly use it.

[Uncle Fester]

Actually, from what I read, it doesn't seem that RIJake was malicious in his intent, just rushing the gun on things before getting proper advice. It certainly doesn't mean he deliberately disregarded anyone's advice, it appears based on the small fragment of what was provided, that he was impatient.

There were a bunch of people giving their opinions on that board, and it sounds as if he realized after the fact that he might have made a mistake in his impatient actions, but I still don't have all the facts.

It's difficult to judge peoples personalities based on what they post on a blog or message board, and I am one to give someone the benefit of the doubt based on that, so let's have some more info. Anyone got anything?

Perhaps Mr. Archer himself could give his side, we could certainly use it.

I'm willing to give anybody the benefit of the doubt, but it's kind of hard to justify that when he titles his thread "Beware this man". It is difficult to judge people's personalities based on what they post, but if he is impatient and has a track record for ignoring solicited advice in favor of what he feels is the right course of action, it's not to big of a stretch to believe that there's probably a very enlightening other side to this story. Furthermore, it's not very difficult to determine someone's intent when they end their first post in the thread titled "Beware this man" with "This man has no spine and is a disgrace to our cause". I'd like to hear Jim's side of the story too, but he hasn't even posted on his own message board since August 11th.

[theGringo]

I'm willing to give anybody the benefit of the doubt, but it's kind of hard to justify that when he titles his thread "Beware this man". It is difficult to judge people's personalities based on what they post, but if he is impatient and has a track record for ignoring solicited advice in favor of what he feels is the right course of action, it's not to big of a stretch to believe that there's probably a very enlightening other side to this story. Furthermore, it's not very difficult to determine someone's intent when they end their first post in the thread titled "Beware this man" with "This man has no spine and is a disgrace to our cause". I'd like to hear Jim's side of the story too, but he hasn't even posted on his own message board since August 11th.

So, what you're saying (if I understand correctly) is that it's hard to sling the sh*t at NES because odds are you'll be called on it.

Or am I reading too much into this?

[Uncle Fester]

So, what you're saying (if I understand correctly) is that it's hard to sling the sh*t at NES because odds are you'll be called on it.

Or am I reading too much into this?

You shouldn't be slinging sh*t anywhere. If you've got a gripe that you want to bring to light, by all means do it, but do it tastefully and give that person a chance to defend them self. My point from that post was to correct what Timbob1 was saying (that Rijake was not malicious in his intent), by quoting Rijake's first post and thread title.

You can sling all the sh*t you you want, but you better damn sure be in the right, or doing it to an audience that agrees with you if you expect not to get called on it. That's not just NES, that's life.

[TimJ]

Considering how much Jim has done for the right to carry in RI I think it's prudent to give him the benefit of the doubt in any event, no? As stated above he's nearly single handedly changed the atmosphere around for all of us. He's got a winning strategy.

I know that he is very involoved in local politics, and I imagine that he's quite wrapped up in that and his day job at this time.

Although I haven't seen Jim in years I have known him since the early 1980's, and I'm sure he'll reply when he has the time and inclination.

[derek]

Considering how much Jim has done for the right to carry in RI I think it's prudent to give him the benefit of the doubt in any event, no? As stated above he's nearly single handedly changed the atmosphere around for all of us. He's got a winning strategy.

+1

[WILDCATT]

the Rhode Island State association.in other words.the official association who represents the gun owners of Rhode Island.
Is that what you want?? is it clear.