- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,485
- Likes
- 33,480
Definitions:Wouldn't that be based on the judge buying into the whole "dangerous" guns horse shit ?
- Injunction remains - States "gun list" is not in effect while waiting final ruling
- Injunction lifted - States gun list remains in effect while waiting final ruling
- Plaintiff wins - Stats gun list relegated to the scrapheap of bad ideas and not applied
- Plaintiff loses - Court uphold states right to screw over plaintiff (and others)
Looking at 4 scenarios:
- Injunction remains, Plaintiff wins - no "harm"
- Injunction remains, Plaintiff loses - "Harm" is the defendant (state) has permanently lost the ability to screw over plaintiff who bought a non-anointed gun.
- Injunction lifted, Plainftff wins - "Harm" was allowing plaintiff to be temporarily screwed over by the state.
- Injunction lifted, Plaintiff loses - No "harm" as stats right to screw over plaintiff never compromised.
It can be tricky to understand the legal basis when evaluating a case through the lens of what you feel about the actual merits of the arguments.