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.
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS June Giveaway ***Keltec SUB2000***
The infuriating thing about this is that there's no injunction against her, keeping things status quo the way they WERE. I do not understand how she gets to re-write law and it stays that way (abrogating our rights) as it is fought through the courts....for years.
*******The infuriating thing about this is that there's no injunction against her, keeping things status quo the way they WERE. I do not understand how she gets to re-write law and it stays that way (abrogating our rights) as it is fought through the courts....for years.
*******Because she hasn't actually changed the law- what she did is basically threaten to prosecute someone using her "new interpretation". I think in order to even get an injunction you'd have to be in some kind of position where she actually took real legal action going beyond a mere threat. Sending out a notice saying "I'm going to be a douchebag" apparently isn't enough to get an injunction against someone.
-Mike
Isn't Her highness still on the hook for the Exxon issue, involving some shenanigans with New York officials?
Easy guys, a house did fall on her sister....
On that note I hope spontaneous combustion
Updates to the case are in order. A hearing on the AG's MTD was held on April 7th. There will be a transcript available eventually, which will be interesting. Things got off to a little bit of a rocky start. Rather than giving the AG the opportunity to speak first in support of their MTD, which is the normally procedure, the judge went right to plaintiffs asking them how they can connect their vagueness claim to something that isn't either a law or regulation. In the end, he also threw them a lifeline and both parties were allowed to file supplemental briefs. For now we wait to see if the judge grant's the AG's motion to dismiss. If the judge denies the AG's MTD, we move on to discovery and probably eventually a trial. The judge seemed much more open-minded than I'd expected.
02/27/2017 - Notice of Supplemental Authorities in support of AG's MTD.
03/09/2017 - Defendant's reply to Plaintiff's Response to the AG's MTD.
04/18/2017 - AG's Supplemental Memorandum in support of their MTD.
04/18/2017 - Plaintiff's Supplemental Brief in support of their opposition to the AG's MTD.
IIRC one of these shops (Pulman Arms) no longer sells firearms but still does gunsmithing. Another shop, Grrr Gear in Orange MA is a small "Mom & Pop" operation. Unfortunately the "Pop" passed away while traveling to the SHOT Show in Vegas. "Mom" has vowed to stay the course and it's business as usual.This is great news, my next purchase will come from one of these shops.
Would not make a bit of difference, as the legal arguments would be the same and the suit is already fully funded.Consider the impact if ALL Mass gun shops had the balls to join in the lawsuit?
IIRC one of these shops (Pulman Arms) no longer sells firearms but still does gunsmithing.
Another shop, Grrr Gear in Orange MA is a small "Mom & Pop" operation. Unfortunately the "Pop" passed away while traveling to the SHOT Show in Vegas. "Mom" has vowed to stay the course and it's business as usual.
The more dealers there are sharing the cost of this, the better.You don't need 300 plaintiffs.
Too bad most FFLs are too god damned self serving to look past profits and tell the state to f*** off... rhymes with Poor ReasonsI wished the FFLs in this state did what another vendor did when Maura lobbed threats at them; we aren't breaking the law, talk to our lawyer and go f*** yourself.
Too bad there is no worker's union for MA FFLs...that would have come in handy in keeping Maura at bay while still selling ARs.
The dealers aren't paying for this.The more dealers there are sharing the cost of this, the better.
The dealers aren't paying for this.
Nothing stopping you from opening a shop.Too bad most FFLs are too god damned self serving to look past profits and tell the state to f*** off... rhymes with Poor Reasons
Thankfully I have one that I frequent regularly that gives far better service and I know cares beyond a bottom line.Nothing stopping you from opening a shop.
The dealers aren't helping finance this?
According to the Comm2A site, May 7th.When is the trial date? I thought i heard it was sometime this month but havent heard anything in months
Worman is a different case from NSSF v Healey. In the latter case, I believe that there are motions pending before the court.According to the Comm2A site, May 7th.
Worman v. Baker - Commonwealth Second Amendment, Inc. (comm2a.org)
Worman is a different case from NSSF v Healey. In the latter case, I believe that there are motions pending before the court.
Oh goodie, they have decided to allow a show trial.Breaking: AG’s motion to dismiss - DENIED! The case moves forward!