The state's pattern of vindictiveness and gross overreach puts it in the same position as the NYC case in terms of being significant enough to potentially not moot because of the state's demonstrated willingness to engage in improper behavior. Just because the state stopped, doesn't mean they won't do it again under any circumstances and that's unacceptable. If anything, the state will keep engaging in the behavior under the flimsiest of circumstances (oh noez 'gun violence' 'epidemic' in shithole city in one part of the state SHUT IT ALL DOWN until the gang members stop shooting each other and turn their lives around in the music industry!!111) until it finally faces legal push back.
-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Comm2A, SAF, GOAL and FPC file against Baker admin on shop closures
- Thread starter Comm2A
- Start date
The state's pattern of vindictiveness and gross overreach puts it in the same position as the NYC case in terms of being significant enough to potentially not moot because of the state's demonstrated willingness to engage in improper behavior. Just because the state stopped, doesn't mean they won't do it again under any circumstances and that's unacceptable. If anything, the state will keep engaging in the behavior under the flimsiest of circumstances (oh noez 'gun violence' 'epidemic' in shithole city in one part of the state SHUT IT ALL DOWN until the gang members stop shooting each other and turn their lives around in the music industry!!111) until it finally faces legal push back.
During any oral presentations, I'd ad the following example about need for Self Defensive purposed of firearms to the reasoning already included in the complaint(s):
Due to a variety of the changes brought on by the 'Covid-19: Stay at Home' orders, criminal elements are brazenly taking advantage of fewer witnesses to crime and greater distractions by Police as noted in the following events:
Neptune Beach resident shoots at 3 armed robbers (With Ring camera footage)
Due to a variety of the changes brought on by the 'Covid-19: Stay at Home' orders, criminal elements are brazenly taking advantage of fewer witnesses to crime and greater distractions by Police as noted in the following events:
Neptune Beach resident shoots at 3 armed robbers (With Ring camera footage)
GM-GUY
NES Member
It’s an illegal taking. A taking requires compensation, but that has even been cutoff by Faker by blocking govt grant funds.
but, Cuz Guns
but, Cuz Guns
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,528
- Likes
- 33,546
I am not sure any court, even in a pro-gun state, would consider a temporary closure order a "taking".
GM-GUY
NES Member
Not allowing a business to use its property as it sees fit. I heard a GOP Rep from Texas agree with this line of thought.
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,528
- Likes
- 33,546
We are not talking logic here but law. EVERY restrictive zoning change is a taking, but only a small percentage are seen as such by the courts. The courts might also rule the temporary nature renders it not a taking, just like the NTB tire store on 135 in Natick probably can't get compensation for the taking of having access to its services blocked off on marathon day.
Last edited:
GM-GUY
NES Member
The government would never and has never admitted it’s on the hook for its own screw ups.
Lank
NES Member
Ahhh yes, the old government position of good for me but not for thee. More evidence that the left is the party of government, and not the people.
Lank
NES Member
I just fell out of my chair reading this. Do you know the name of the case?
KBCraig
NES Member
I remember that.
KBCraig
NES Member
Here's a case from Florida.
2 Opposing Theories in a Murder, And Both Are the Prosecution's (Published 2002)
Prosecutors in Pensacola, Fla, offer two theories in murder case and conduct simultaneous, separate trials for crime that only one defendant or set of defendants could have committed; Judge Frank Bell, who has already presided over trial of Rick Chavis in murder of Terry Lee King, is now...
71montess
NES Member
Town health depts are ALWAYS run by liberal Do As I Say NAZIs.
This is accurate. Under current jurisprudence a regulatory taking is only a taking if it totally denies a property owner the use of his property. Regulations the diminish value without eliminating it are not regulatory takings.
If I were on the Supreme Court I would dramatically expand the legal definition of a taking, but alas, I am not.
Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co. - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Prior to this SCotUS ruling zoning only applied to regulations created prior to government's sale of land.
And of course this shit because MA.
Nectow v. City of Cambridge - Wikipedia
Thank you sir, I definately live in a communistic State!!!! PPoMA
Proposed amicus brief of Pink Pistols.
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,528
- Likes
- 33,546
For precision, it should say "medical MJ facilities", not just "MJ facilities".
71montess
NES Member
It should close with, I know from past prescedent that your political liberalism puts your thumb on the scale of fair justice. Your statism makes you predisposed to value the States concerns over the liberty of individuals, and your low intellect which causes you to look at the lower level of scrutiny that is opposit of the people who wrote the documents in the first place, explicitly intended. Boom, mike drop !
Last edited:
71montess
NES Member
Oh, so the gov will be compensating the shop owners for their loss of income from operations then? If not that sure seems like a "taking" to me...
Im hoping the case will eventually get ruled in our favor for any similar events in the future .
Lank
NES Member
I mean this in nicest possible way, but to use the word liberal to describe these people is falling for their trick. A much more accurate term would be tyrant, dictator, and the like. What the leftists have done successfully for years is change the meaning of words to fit their narrative. The worst example is "right wing nazi". The nazis were socialists. There is nothing liberal about today's "liberals".
I think the brief’s wording was carefully chosen. The order exempted medical marijuana, yes, but many dispensaries provide both medical and recreational pot, so the order allows for those to stay open (dare I say “loophole?”)
R
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,528
- Likes
- 33,546
I thought the medical/rec places were now limited to medical only sales. Is this not the case? I know that that is is, that that is not it not, but is that it or is it not?
My style in an argument is to make sure no fact I present can be refuted as false. This differs from the AGs style where alternative facts are fabricated in the hopes of finding a receptive audience (as in "An FID card allows a handgun in the home")
84ta406
NES Member
My sister was turned away from a dispensary, only selling to MMJ card holders.
AFAIK, yes - but my point was that they do get to stay open, so no need to distinguish the sales type when detailing locations (“establishments”) that are permitted to be open.
R
Right, but the doors weren’t locked with a sign “ Closed due to C-19, sorry for the inconvenience” like so may other businesses.
R
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,528
- Likes
- 33,546
The counter argument is that medical use is worth the risk of foot traffic into the stores whereas recreational use is not.
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,528
- Likes
- 33,546
Strictly speaking the sign should read "Closed by government edict".
