So, the libtard judge all of a sudden now is a Scalia-esque textualist?
Doesn't she realize how blatantly obvious her disingenuousness is?
No, it doesn't directly, plainly call out libraries, but in the pre-amble to the law they lay out that the STATE ITSELF it to be the only entity to have the power to regulate firearms. Does she expect an all inclusive list that would also include agencies or entities that have not been created or even pondered yet? What an incredibly unintelligent dissension. It's clear the intent of the law was to grant the STATE and ONLY THE STATE the powers of regulation. How can this be interpreted any other way!?
This is a great win.
ETA: The MLIVE article -WRONGLY- states that MOC filed suit against CADL.
Please email Mr. Oosting and urge him to correct his mistake immediately.
Here's my e-mail:
Mr. Oosting,
Please immediately post a correction for this article:
http://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/2012/10/michigan_court_of_appeals_owne.html
Michigan Open Carry (MOC) absolutely DID NOT file suit against the Capital Area District Library (CADL)
City of Lansing police were not enforcing the CADL weapons ban because their ban was ILLEGAL. People were carrying in the library (much to their chagrin) and they were upset the police were not doing anything. (no laws were being broken)
CADL was the one who filed suit. CADL was the one who brought this ERRONEOUS lawsuit against MOC and it's members and ALL the people of the state of Michigan. CADL was the one who wasted over $100,000.00 of tax payers money fighting something that was NOT ILLEGAL in the first place.
Please post this correction immediately.
Thank you!!!!