Lawsuit against MA AWB

I do wish people would consider the consequences of loss in these cases. NAGR, ffs
I don't know the back story with NAGR (saw some negative stuff), but the complaint seemed to hit the key points. What was the strategic value in waiting? It seems like a challenge is long past due.
 
I don't know the back story with NAGR (saw some negative stuff), but the complaint seemed to hit the key points. What was the strategic value in waiting? It seems like a challenge is long past due.
How about a better written brief?
Sorry, I wouldn't likely write a more eloquent brief but it falls far short of the quality that is coming from the other groups.
And, unfortunately, the quality of the writing is just as important as its basis in law.
 
I don't know the back story with NAGR (saw some negative stuff), but the complaint seemed to hit the key points. What was the strategic value in waiting? It seems like a challenge is long past due.
Well it’s been two and a half months and you’ll notice the usual suspects (Comm2A, etc) haven’t filed yet. I assume they have a good reason to wait. For example, we don’t yet have persuasive but non binding precedent in the CA and MD cases that SCOTUS remanded after Bruen. The First Circuit and this district court will do anything to rule against gun rights so we need all the ammunition we can possibly get before filing.
 
I've seen it before but I don't remember exactly where
It is almost "the elephant in the room". It discusses the AR15 as being the civilian version of the M16. As a semi-automatic rifle, it is in common use for legitimate legal purposes. The question in the case is whether the possessor knew that this particular AR15 was modified with M16 parts and the selector stop filed off when the possessor never attempted to fire the AR as an automatic rifle.
 
Good it's about time. We already know what scotus is going to say, they GVRed the MD case back to the circuit court earlier this year. Waiting for someone else is stupid and unnecessary. What's bad for the constitution in CA or HI or in the middle of Podunk AR is just as bad in MA.
 
It is almost "the elephant in the room". It discusses the AR15 as being the civilian version of the M16. As a semi-automatic rifle, it is in common use for legitimate legal purposes. The question in the case is whether the possessor knew that this particular AR15 was modified with M16 parts and the selector stop filed off when the possessor never attempted to fire the AR as an automatic rifle.
Okay - I remember the case but don't remember which case I saw that referred to Staples (or the outcome of that case)
I don't think the jurisprudence will be solidified enough for five or more years but the whole AR-15/M-16 debate should fall if text, tradition and history is actually applied
 
long shot nuisance suit, done mostly to tar Healey for overreach and violation of rights.

Will it work? Who knows, but it is an unwanted distraction for Dimples that diverts resources, media attn and gives her opponent a stick to club her with…
 
Here come all the haters, you guys don’t understand. We need to be like the left and be just absolutely relentless. File lawsuit after lawsuit after lawsuit. It’s a grind. A lost case isn’t going to hurt us unless it loses at the SCOTUS.

You need as many cases as possible to get as far up the chain as possible.
 
Here come all the haters, you guys don’t understand. We need to be like the left and be just absolutely relentless. File lawsuit after lawsuit after lawsuit. It’s a grind. A lost case isn’t going to hurt us unless it loses at the SCOTUS.

You need as many cases as possible to get as far up the chain as possible.
Yes it does - each avenue of attack is closed in a loss. If a winning pathway is poorly argued then that's it, no second bite at that apple.
 
Here come all the haters, you guys don’t understand. We need to be like the left and be just absolutely relentless. File lawsuit after lawsuit after lawsuit. It’s a grind. A lost case isn’t going to hurt us unless it loses at the SCOTUS.

You need as many cases as possible to get as far up the chain as possible.
I disagree. When it comes to 2A lawsuits, they need to be strategic and well thought out. Bad cases can result in bad precedents. Heller, MacDonald, and Bruen didn’t succeed by throwing cases at the wall and hoping one would stick. They were well planned, well reasoned, and well written.
 
So is paragraph 13 the main argument? That "assault weapon" isn't a real term so therefore all laws are null and void?
No. Paragraph 13 is a tantrum.

"The legal term of art offends us, so we're going to use this other one we've just made up (except when we use the one we dislike) for the rest of this brief."

Frankly, it reminds me of the briefing about range closures during COVID. I'm not a great writer. As attorneys, it's their job to be. If I feel like I could do better, we have a problem.
 
Yes it does - each avenue of attack is closed in a loss. If a winning pathway is poorly argued then that's it, no second bite at that apple.
Was this a poorly argued attack and isn't the pathway already closed for all intents and purposes with the status quo?
 
Back
Top Bottom