Vermont magazine ban lawsuit update:

[VTHunter]

Just thought I'd share this link to the Federation's Raffle.

VFSC Raffle

 

[Drix]

Just thought I'd share this link to the Federation's Raffle.

VFSC Raffle

Just be careful, VT has no duty to report law when it comes to raffle winners. I found this out after buying tickets to the last gun show I went to before covid. Raffle for a junior shooting team was supposed to be pulled during lockdown or when X tickets were sold, in July when I finally pulled my ticket out of my wallet I attempted to find who did win and found that not only were their no announcements of a winner, but all the apparent social media platforms for the group were defunct.

I don't want to say a winner was never pulled, but given my experience with the MA raffle guy and the Steyr Aug, I'm leaning towards it wasn't.

 

[exo]

Just be careful, VT has no duty to report law when it comes to raffle winners. I found this out after buying tickets to the last gun show I went to before covid. Raffle for a junior shooting team was supposed to be pulled during lockdown or when X tickets were sold, in July when I finally pulled my ticket out of my wallet I attempted to find who did win and found that not only were their no announcements of a winner, but all the apparent social media platforms for the group were defunct.

I don't want to say a winner was never pulled, but given my experience with the MA raffle guy and the Steyr Aug, I'm leaning towards it wasn't.

The Vermont Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs (VFSC) isn’t some fly by night organization.

 

[Drix]

The Vermont Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs (VFSC) isn’t some fly by night organization.

Tickets were from the VSRPA. I'd still be suspect of any raffle up there though that isn't reporting winners somewhere at least for PR's sake- Facebook, twitter, Instagram, something.

 

[Noreaster]

The thing was there was always a question mark there. In the past, most anti gun bills got blown off chewed up and spit out. Problem is in the last wave of garbage passed there, Bloombergs operatives penetrated the legislature in VT and basically put on a parlimentary hack 3 ring circus. Legislation was rammed through, and by the time the small pro 2a contingent could react, it was already long over.

Didn't help matters either that they had/Have a Mittens-like RINO f***tard as a governor, either, that didn't have the balls to veto it. A veto would have f***ed them over hard because even if they had (potentially) enough for an override it would have increased the political exposure on the issue dramatically.

In 2018 when the gun laws started coming down, GOVT (Gun Owners of VT) claimed that 75% of the state legislature were people from NY/CT that relocated to VT and started pushing this stuff. The bill that reduced civil rights(liberties) to mags was a bill that was written up by a senator to sell guns that police departments confiscated and were not claimed. It went into committee, then parkland, then there was a school shooting scare in fair haven. The bill came out of committee completely re-written putting in place more background checks, upped minimum ages and put in place a mag capacity ban. The senator that wrote the original bill was publicly saying WTF to it.

When the bill came to vote, it was verbal and not a roll call. The president of the senate jumped quickly to slam the gavel and ignored roll call requests. She was an implant from NY as well.
I remember all this clearly as i was purchasing a ski home, in a gun friendly state. That friggen worked out well.

(it may have been the house, not the senate, i cannot recall exactly what i was watching at that point)

 

[rommel]

In 2018 when the gun laws started coming down, GOVT (Gun Owners of VT) claimed that 75% of the state legislature were people from NY/CT that relocated to VT and started pushing this stuff. The bill that reduced civil rights(liberties) to mags was a bill that was written up by a senator to sell guns that police departments confiscated and were not claimed. It went into committee, then parkland, then there was a school shooting scare in fair haven. The bill came out of committee completely re-written putting in place more background checks, upped minimum ages and put in place a mag capacity ban. The senator that wrote the original bill was publicly saying WTF to it.

When the bill came to vote, it was verbal and not a roll call. The president of the senate jumped quickly to slam the gavel and ignored roll call requests. She was an implant from NY as well.
I remember all this clearly as i was purchasing a ski home, in a gun friendly state. That friggen worked out well.

Oh, so it was your fault.

 

[VTHunter]

In 2018 when the gun laws started coming down, GOVT (Gun Owners of VT) claimed that 75% of the state legislature were people from NY/CT that relocated to VT and started pushing this stuff. The bill that reduced civil rights(liberties) to mags was a bill that was written up by a senator to sell guns that police departments confiscated and were not claimed. It went into committee, then parkland, then there was a school shooting scare in fair haven. The bill came out of committee completely re-written putting in place more background checks, upped minimum ages and put in place a mag capacity ban. The senator that wrote the original bill was publicly saying WTF to it.

When the bill came to vote, it was verbal and not a roll call. The president of the senate jumped quickly to slam the gavel and ignored roll call requests. She was an implant from NY as well.
I remember all this clearly as i was purchasing a ski home, in a gun friendly state. That friggen worked out well.

(it may have been the house, not the senate, i cannot recall exactly what i was watching at that point)

I believe you are referencing the then Vermont Speaker of The House, Mitzi Johnson. She has since been defeated. Further, it is my understanding that the Dem super majority has been eliminated in the legislature. Folks have had enough.

It is also worth noting that there are a whole lot of people who fled NJ, CT, MA, and NY to enjoy their freedoms and are working hard to return things to the prior state. Not all 'transplants' are alike.

 

[exo]

I believe you are referencing the then Vermont Speaker of The House, Mitzi Johnson. She has since been defeated. Further, it is my understanding that the Dem super majority has been eliminated in the legislature. Folks have had enough.

It is also worth noting that there are a whole lot of people who fled NJ, CT, MA, and NY to enjoy their freedoms and are working hard to return things to the prior state. Not all 'transplants' are alike.

Not sure what information you’re looking at, but between dems and progs, they have 23 seats in the state senate vs 7 R’s. In the house it’s 99 dem/prog, 5 “independent”, and 47 R’s. Plus a complete cuckbag traitor RINO governor.

 

[Texasgrillchef]

Are they going to appeal to federal court?

Interestingly they didn’t file a notice that The Federal Circuit Court has already ruled that it’s unconstitutional, and probably will soon be heard in a en Banc hearing and then hopefully by the Supreme Court.

Interestingly though many other states are attempting to pass mag cap bans, even in light of the fact that the lawsuit in the Federal district court 9th circuit has been winning and odds are SCOTUS will hear the case. Guess they are thinking and hoping it will eventually loose!

 

[Parker Schreiber]

Are they going to appeal to federal court?

Interestingly they didn’t file a notice that The Federal Circuit Court has already ruled that it’s unconstitutional, and probably will soon be heard in a en Banc hearing and then hopefully by the Supreme Court.

The Vermont Supreme Court has the final word on interpretations of Vermont's constitution. No Second Amendment claim was made as part of this part of the procedural dance, and without a Federal issue, the U.S. Supreme Court will deny certiorari.

What happens next is either the case against Mr. Misch is dismissed, a plea bargain is struck, he pleads guilty, or the case goes to trial. Unless Vermont caves and allows Misch to keep his magazines, whatever the final disposition of the case, there are grounds for a 2nd Amendment challenge in Federal Court. Whether that challenge takes place before or after the cases from the 3rd and 9th Circuit play the Palace I can't tell you. It's worse than trying to predict the outcome of a race between snails, because the "handlers" of these snails get to make tactical decisions when the race will start.

The 9th Circuit decision was a second amendment decision. It is not binding on the 1st Circuit any more than the 3rd Circuit opinion is. If the en banc petition is granted, it could be well more than a year before the en banc hearing takes place, and another year before the decision comes down. For example, Young v. Hawaii was decided in July of 2018. The en banc petition was granted in February of 2019, and the hearing held in September of 2020. When I checked this morning, that case is marked as not yet decided.

 

[Cap'n Mike]

The person charged is very cringy. If they found a better defendant I would assume they would have had a better chance

My money is on the Vermont SJC cherry picking that case BECAUSE the defendant was so cringy. The outcome of this case was already predetermined by the SJC when they took the case.

 

[Boghog1]

In 2018 when the gun laws started coming down, GOVT (Gun Owners of VT) claimed that 75% of the state legislature were people from NY/CT that relocated to VT and started pushing this stuff. The bill that reduced civil rights(liberties) to mags was a bill that was written up by a senator to sell guns that police departments confiscated and were not claimed. It went into committee, then parkland, then there was a school shooting scare in fair haven. The bill came out of committee completely re-written putting in place more background checks, upped minimum ages and put in place a mag capacity ban. The senator that wrote the original bill was publicly saying WTF to it.

When the bill came to vote, it was verbal and not a roll call. The president of the senate jumped quickly to slam the gavel and ignored roll call requests. She was an implant from NY as well.
I remember all this clearly as i was purchasing a ski home, in a gun friendly state. That friggen worked out well.

(it may have been the house, not the senate, i cannot recall exactly what i was watching at that point)

And that was how we got the Hughes amendment

 

[exo]

My money is on the Vermont SJC cherry picking that case BECAUSE the defendant was so cringy. The outcome of this case was already predetermined by the SJC when they took the case.

Pretty much what happened. There was a civil case challenging the mag ban, but the courts preferred the criminal case. The ruling in the criminal case is ~50 pages of bloviation, and it’s ~1 page in the civil case saying “see the other one”.

 

[Toast]

Any time a lefty argues the “yelling fire “ point as a way to frame their gun control arguments, I simply remind them that I actually CAN yell fire in a crowded room. The government didn’t view it as such a serious risk to public safety that they removed my ability to vocalize and form those words. I can yell it and then be held legally responsible for the results of my vocalization after the fact.

You can also yell "FIRE!" if it's necessary, i.e. if there is a fire.

 

[VTHunter]

Not sure what information you’re looking at, but between dems and progs, they have 23 seats in the state senate vs 7 R’s. In the house it’s 99 dem/prog, 5 “independent”, and 47 R’s. Plus a complete cuckbag traitor RINO governor.

That is not a veto proof majority.

 

[exo]

That is not a veto proof majority.

Are you seriously suggesting that Phil Scott, who signed the first set of real gun control that Vermont has ever had, who has never recanted his support from it, will veto another round of gun control bills?

 

[VTHunter]

Well, there is a bit of a pivot. We were discussing the legislature and the recent defeat of 'anti' legislators leading to the loss of the super-majority. The thread also mentioned that the initial legislation was crafted to address something completely different, and was hijacked by zealots in the legislature. Now, we are on to the governor I guess...

No. I am not suggesting the Governor will veto every gun control bill that would make it to his desk and am not sure anyone here could. He did veto S169 in 2019. That would have imposed a waiting period. The S169 veto followed S30.

I am suggesting that there is less chance of new gun control with the new make-up and, if a bill were to make it through, it would be less egregious.

 

[StevieP]

Any time a lefty argues the “yelling fire “ point as a way to frame their gun control arguments, I simply remind them that I actually CAN yell fire in a crowded room. The government didn’t view it as such a serious risk to public safety that they removed my ability to vocalize and form those words. I can yell it and then be held legally responsible for the results of my vocalization after the fact.

this logic should also apply to guns. It is enumerated as an unrestricted right, so the government limiting magazine capacity is the same logic as operating on my vocal cords so I can no longer make the “fire” sound. It’s for the children after all. It’s a “reasonable” restriction and “common sense”

I phrase it this way. .gov is mandating everyone entering the theatre wear a muzzle to prevent free speech vs holding someone accountable for disturbing the peace AFTER they yell 'Fire!'

 

[exo]

Well, there is a bit of a pivot. We were discussing the legislature and the recent defeat of 'anti' legislators leading to the loss of the super-majority. The thread also mentioned that the initial legislation was crafted to address something completely different, and was hijacked by zealots in the legislature. Now, we are on to the governor I guess...

No. I am not suggesting the Governor will veto every gun control bill that would make it to his desk and am not sure anyone here could. He did veto S169 in 2019. That would have imposed a waiting period. The S169 veto followed S30.

I am suggesting that there is less chance of new gun control with the new make-up and, if a bill were to make it through, it would be less egregious.

We’ll just have to agree to disagree then. Personally I think the myth of gun control being the third rail of VT politics has been exposed as such, and they’re out for blood.

 

[Texasgrillchef]

The Vermont Supreme Court has the final word on interpretations of Vermont's constitution. No Second Amendment claim was made as part of this part of the procedural dance, and without a Federal issue, the U.S. Supreme Court will deny certiorari.

What happens next is either the case against Mr. Misch is dismissed, a plea bargain is struck, he pleads guilty, or the case goes to trial. Unless Vermont caves and allows Misch to keep his magazines, whatever the final disposition of the case, there are grounds for a 2nd Amendment challenge in Federal Court. Whether that challenge takes place before or after the cases from the 3rd and 9th Circuit play the Palace I can't tell you. It's worse than trying to predict the outcome of a race between snails, because the "handlers" of these snails get to make tactical decisions when the race will start.

The 9th Circuit decision was a second amendment decision. It is not binding on the 1st Circuit any more than the 3rd Circuit opinion is. If the en banc petition is granted, it could be well more than a year before the en banc hearing takes place, and another year before the decision comes down. For example, Young v. Hawaii was decided in July of 2018. The en banc petition was granted in February of 2019, and the hearing held in September of 2020. When I checked this morning, that case is marked as not yet decided.

Well anyone who keeps tabs of various cases challenging law based on it’s constitutionality should know it takes years. There is one gentleman I can’t remember his name off the top of my head that has had litigation pending with California on Open carry for the last 10 years and is still a few years from even getting to SCOTUS. If memory serves correctly I think his case is stayed pending the outcome of young v Hawaii. Which by the way had been stayed awhile due to the NYC case with SCOTUS that got ruled moot.

The cases in the 9th circuit of course won’t have any substantial effect on the rest of the county unless SCOTUS agrees to hear the case. Even if En Banc is denied, and SCOTUS agrees to hear Duncan v Becerra, it will be at least 2 years before SCOTUS issues an opinion for or against us. If en Banc is granted. It will mean at least 4 more years before we will get an answer.

One other thing to note though, is if Duncan V Becerra is granted a hearing with SCOTUS. It will put a stay on many similar cases across the country. Just like the NYC case put a stay on many cases such as Young v Hawaii.

One thing is for sure though. No matter who the looser is in Young v Hawaii one side or the other will be filing a writ of certiorari petition with SCOTUS. Hopefully they will agree to hear the case.