Yes it was a first offense OUI in mass in 2012. Shitty lawyer who failed to explain things and yes conviction in 2012. Won't get into too many details on the board. I've been in touch with someone on the board but its a slow process to move forward with things especially right now with Rona virus everywhere.
-
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.
Supreme Court decides not to hear big gun-rights cases, dealing blow to Second Amendment activists
- Thread starter LoginName
- Start date
Yes it was a first offense OUI in mass in 2012. Shitty lawyer who failed to explain things and yes conviction in 2012. Won't get into too many details on the board. I've been in touch with someone on the board but its a slow process to move forward with things especially right now with Rona virus everywhere.
VetteGirlMA
NES Member
Man our side sure looks pathetic compared to the antis. Here's how we are pinning our hopes starting today and going forward:
--- Pro 2A logic
if (trump.reelected = true) {
if (RBG.ShufflesLooseTheMortalCoil = true) {
if (nextTrumpPick.alignment = Pro2A) {
if (scotus.nextCase = cert_granted) {
if (scotus.ruling = Pro2A) {
system.everyone.celebrate;
} else{
system.everyone.shafting;
} else {
Constitution.2A = this.irrelevant;
} else {
Set Pro2A.nextCase = today + 40 years;
} else {
Election.voteForTrump = null;
} else {
Everyone.WereAllScrewed = true;
}
}
}
That's a lot of ifs. We have 1 path to victory and 5 ways to lose.
-- Anti 2A logic
if (bloomberg.donation > 1) {
system.everyone.shafting;
}
They have 1 path to victory and no ways to lose.
--- Pro 2A logic
if (trump.reelected = true) {
if (RBG.ShufflesLooseTheMortalCoil = true) {
if (nextTrumpPick.alignment = Pro2A) {
if (scotus.nextCase = cert_granted) {
if (scotus.ruling = Pro2A) {
system.everyone.celebrate;
} else{
system.everyone.shafting;
} else {
Constitution.2A = this.irrelevant;
} else {
Set Pro2A.nextCase = today + 40 years;
} else {
Election.voteForTrump = null;
} else {
Everyone.WereAllScrewed = true;
}
}
}
That's a lot of ifs. We have 1 path to victory and 5 ways to lose.
-- Anti 2A logic
if (bloomberg.donation > 1) {
system.everyone.shafting;
}
They have 1 path to victory and no ways to lose.
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,530
- Likes
- 33,560
F--k.
Ineffective assistance of counsel if PP consequence was not fully explained before you elected to go to trial.
Goliathan
NES Member
As much as I hate this whole situation, we have to keep in mind that they may have four favorable votes to grant cert, but they may not have five favorable votes when it comes to the actual decision.
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,530
- Likes
- 33,560
Denial of cert has no precedental value, and is no where near as bad as getting cert and losing. A similar case can be picked up by a later court without it being the big deal that is involved in reversing an existing decision.
Dennis in MA
NES Member
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2007
- Messages
- 38,269
- Likes
- 33,190
It sure would be nice if Roberts gave a clear signal of what case he wants in order to rule in our favor. Similar to how the MASC basically gave a guideline of what sort of gay-marriage case they wanted in order to rule correctly 15 or so years ago.
I mean, no one had Margaret Pissypants arrested or impeached at the time, so it must be legal.
I mean, no one had Margaret Pissypants arrested or impeached at the time, so it must be legal.
HARRYM
NES Member
Yup, I have said it many times over many years, the Constitution ain't worth the paper it's written on.
Whutmeworry
NES Member
It takes political will for the Constitution to be enforced. The irony is that the Constitution was written largely to OPPOSE laws. Political will is now trending towards IMPOSING laws, even as those driving said laws say they are necessary to “protect freedom”. We have no choice but to call those ideas out as the opposite of their intent every time we encounter them.
peterk123
NES Member
So if I read between the lines of Thomas' comments, here is I read: No need to bring this to the Supreme Court. No need to adhere to any of those silly State laws. You have a Constitutional Right to Bear Arms. Have at it.
Clear as day as far as I am concerned.
Last edited:
Kavanaugh joined Thomas in dissenting from the denial.
Asaltweapon
NES Member
I'm just thrilled right to my short hairs that the LGBTQ community gets its protections from the same court.
DispositionMatrix
NES Member
HorizontalHunter
NES Member
Whutmeworry
NES Member
It becomes clearer to me with every session that Justice Thomas is really the only friend we have on the SCOTUS.So if I read between the lines of Thomas' comments, here is I read: No need to bring this to the Supreme Court. No need to adhere to any of those sill State laws. You have a Constitutional Right to Bear Arms. Have at it.
Clear as day as far as I am concerned.
- Joined
- May 1, 2009
- Messages
- 2,182
- Likes
- 3,331
Chevy 2 65
NES Member
Thomas, Kavanaugh lament 'decade-long failure to protect the Second Amendment'
Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas and Brett Kavanagh on Monday admonished their fellow justices for letting Second Amendment cases languish in the lower courts in a dissent to the tribunal's decision not to take up a gun rights case.
What do I do with this? Report Healy? The state of Massachusetts? Kind if sarcastic, kind of serious.
Should we all be filing reports? Well, at least us ma**h***s...
