Protecting our 2nd Amendment Rights

Discussion in 'West Mall' started by Austin_Bill, Apr 28, 2020.

  1. mb227

    mb227 5,000+ Posts

    Oh, so your objection isn't that attorneys are doing their job, you just wish they were not doing their job because this case had kids involved.

    The records come from the school, not the parents, so there is no intimidation that could occur. Schools produce records on a regular basis in response to subpoenas. Sometimes they will object, as do many entities, but the reality is that this is simply part of legal practice. But since the lefty media is telling you and bubba to be up in arms, you are complying like the dutiful libtile that you are...

    Interesting slippery slope you endorse...I guarantee that if YOU found yourself as a defendant, you would not be instructing counsel representing your interest to hold back in any manner. So I guess that just makes you a hypocrite.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Hot Hot x 1
  2. Duck Dodgers

    Duck Dodgers 1,000+ Posts

    Anything from Vice, which recently had an article asking why some many Marines were actually National Socialists (published on the same day that 11 of them were killed in Afghanistan) is garbage that has zero merit. On a more positive note, Vice this week had to lay off over two dozen of their staff - who hopefully will have to sell their bodies on the street to survive.

    Most likely, Remington asked for a whole bunch of school related data, and things like attendance records and such were included in the packet, which was then leaked to Vice who fabricated this made up story.

    In real 2nd Amendment news, the state of Texas now, through the fantastic work of grassroots gun owners being involved in the political process this year in the Legislature, now has Constitutional Carry, where law abiding citizens can now carry a handgun concealed, or open, without having to obtain a government issued permit.

    Texas is the 21st state to now CC, and is by far the largest by population. A host of other pro-gun laws passed this year, such as 2nd Amendment Sanctuary State (no state or local support to help the Fed enforce any new Federal gun laws), anti-boycott laws - mostly directed towards anti-2A banks like Chase or Bank of America - who will now lose all business with the state of Texas if they continue to blacklist firearms companies and stores, and an interesting challenge to the Federal restrictions on sound suppressors by allowing a Made in Texas version, to avoid the interstate commerce clause aspect.

    As I've written before, it was a fantastic effort by gun owners this year, and a stunning rebuke to Nanny Bloomber and his silly Moms Demand Action!!! group (part of the Brazzers network), who had foolish hopes of getting various gun grabbing laws passed this year. Instead, he gets to see the biggest advancement in Texas gun rights in 100 years. Good job Nanny!
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. OUBubba

    OUBubba Reluctant and Bullied Sponsor

    Funny. You burn all those calories on vice. It was the link I strolled across on the Twitter. Is this better? More your speed. https://nypost.com/2021/09/03/remington-subpoenas-report-cards-of-kids-killed-in-sandy-hook/

    O
    r this: http://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/DocumentInquiry/DocumentInquiry.aspx?DocumentNo=21327555

    nice deflection though.
     
  4. Duck Dodgers

    Duck Dodgers 1,000+ Posts

    Still rubbish. Lawyers try to get as much info as possible for background on a case.

    The murdered killed his mom, stole her gun, and then shot up the school. Hard to see how that's the gun manufactures fault - unless you just want to put gun makers out of business, which is the goal.
     
  5. Duck Dodgers

    Duck Dodgers 1,000+ Posts

  6. Horn6721

    Horn6721 10,000+ Posts

    DD
    How problematic is the last paragraph?
     
  7. mb227

    mb227 5,000+ Posts

    Short answer is that it isn't. They had that ability even under concealed carry and LTC. It is why SOME CHL/LTC folks were asked to step out of the car on a routine traffic stop since it placed distance between them and the firearm.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  8. Horn6721

    Horn6721 10,000+ Posts

    mb
    Thanks I knew you'd know
    So when someone steps out of the car then they are too far away from it and the firearm to be arrested?
     
  9. mb227

    mb227 5,000+ Posts

    Nothing in what you quoted means an arrest would occur. It simply says that they may be disarmed. It is NOT a permanent disarming. It IS a harm reduction.

    If someone acts a fool during a traffic stop, they deserve whatever follows in the way of potential arrest or consequence. But absent a prohibition on possession, they would not be tagged for UCW.
     
  10. Horn6721

    Horn6721 10,000+ Posts

    Ah
    So getting them out of a vehicle is the same, at that point,of disarming them

    But later the peace officer could arrest the person saying in their opinion it is necessary for the protection etc etc?
     
  11. mb227

    mb227 5,000+ Posts

    Disarming simply means the gun carrier was briefly separated from the firearm. It is NOT an arrest.

    Officers know that ANY traffic stop or otherwise seemingly innocuous contact can twist off the wrong way. It the same reason some are detained with the use of hand restraints during the encounter even though no arrest has occurred...cuffs do NOT mean arrested in every instance.

    It is effectively the same as when there is a dispatch related to some manner of altercation...they separate the parties to figure out what went on or is going on.
     
  12. Horn6721

    Horn6721 10,000+ Posts

    mb
    See. I thought when I read that paragraph in the law it Did mean the person was being arrested .
    Thanks for clearing that up
    If I ever get arrested can I call you?:ousucksnana:
     
  13. Seattle Husker

    Seattle Husker 10,000+ Posts

    If I were paid a nickel for every time @mb227 spoke for me she wouldn't have any money to gamble!

    Knock on wood but to date it's been pretty damn easy to avoid being a defendant, especially as a bankrupt gun manufacturer. If I do, you won't be my first call as ethics due matter in all manner of life to me.
     
  14. bystander

    bystander 5,000+ Posts

    Is it possible they want to determine the earning potential of all the deceased in order to prepare for the settlement/award?

    I agree that going after report cards of elementary school children is ludicrous on the surface. But lawyers are lawyers and they do what they do. That's why we hate them all (except Mr. Deez).
     
  15. mb227

    mb227 5,000+ Posts

    Everybody hates attorneys...UNTIL THEY NEED ONE. Then they want the one that will fight the hardest and potentially also the dirtiest for their client...
     
  16. Seattle Husker

    Seattle Husker 10,000+ Posts

    I've acknowledged that might be a reason. Still, it's a little absurd that a child's 1st grade report card or attendance record would be used to determine their lifetime earning potential.
     
  17. bystander

    bystander 5,000+ Posts

    Not to be flippant but I would have rested on my first grade scores...
     
    • Funny Funny x 3
    • Like Like x 2
  18. Seattle Husker

    Seattle Husker 10,000+ Posts

    Personally, my parents were in the midst of a messy divorce so my 1st grade report card was replete with NI (Needs Improvement) nearly across the board. As a father of 3, what a child looks like at age 6 can be VASTLY different than what they show at age 20 or later.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  19. mb227

    mb227 5,000+ Posts

    And I would venture that there are actuarial tables which show correlations.

    You and the rest of the idiots up in arms about standard practice don't know WHY the request was made. Nevertheless, people like you assigned some nefarious motive. I guess it is time to just scrap the legal system and just automatically allow a plaintiff to receive whatever ill-conceived number they demand...rights of a defendant be damned, especially when the deep-pocket defendant was not responsible for felonious actions of a third party.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  20. bystander

    bystander 5,000+ Posts

    No doubt. I was in a wonderful little bubble at the time and everyone had high hopes for me.
     
  21. OUBubba

    OUBubba Reluctant and Bullied Sponsor

    Do we get to call people idiots now?
     
  22. bystander

    bystander 5,000+ Posts

    For the record, I am 100% against holding gun manufacturers and retail outlets liable for the actions of a 3rd party.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
  23. horninchicago

    horninchicago 10,000+ Posts

    It was attacking the ideals of the poster. The ideals are idiotic. Anyone who thinks otherwise has idiotic ideals.
     
    • Hot Hot x 2
    • Funny Funny x 1
  24. OUBubba

    OUBubba Reluctant and Bullied Sponsor

    You and the rest of the idiots who believe this might be wrong.

    For the record, I plagiarized part of that sentence. :)
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
  25. horninchicago

    horninchicago 10,000+ Posts

    That's one opinion for sure.
     
  26. mb227

    mb227 5,000+ Posts

    When they are whining and sniveling about acceptable legal practice, yes. An entire demographic which relies upon propaganda networks like CNN and MSDNC to tell them what to be offended by is, collectively, a group of idiots.
     
    • Winner Winner x 4
    • Hot Hot x 1
  27. Seattle Husker

    Seattle Husker 10,000+ Posts

    You missed your calling. The broad brushes with which you paint groups of people is reminiscent of Rembrandt.
     
  28. Duck Dodgers

    Duck Dodgers 1,000+ Posts

    In real 2nd Amendment news, the turd David Chipman, Slow Joe's pick to head AFT, as he slurred it out (it's actually the ATF, but what do you expect from the senile old man who can't remember the name of his Secretary of Defense), had his nomination get pulled, as he was too much of a piece of trash even for the Democrats.

    Great win by the gun rights groups to sink this turd, who worked as a lobbyist for a gun grabbing group, and wanted to make semi-auto firearms illegal to own.

    It's been a good year for gun rights - awesome results in the Texas legislative session, including Constitutional Carry. The Attorney General is starting to clamp down on gun company boycotts by financial firms, who will have to decide if they wish to lose the State of Texas' business as well, and Depend's pick for the ATF gets flushed down the toilet.

    Plus the Supreme Court will hear this fall the case of the New York concealed firearm licensing scheme, which is "May Issue" if they like you, compared to "Shall Issue" like most states if you meet all legal requirements. I think the SC tosses most of that out the window and forces them to go to a Shall Issue system, as the courts did with Illinois and DC some years ago.

    Will be interesting if the Coward John Roberts tries to join the opinion to water it down to the point that it doesn't mean anything, or if he stompy feets it to stay in the good graces of the Bezos Post - the newspaper than can make him wet himself in shame merely from the use of the word "legitimacy".
     
    • Like Like x 1
  29. EDT

    EDT 1,000+ Posts

    [​IMG]
     
    • Funny Funny x 4
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Hot Hot x 1
  30. EDT

    EDT 1,000+ Posts

    [​IMG]
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1

Share This Page