Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 54

Thread: SAF gets heavyweight support in carry case motion to SCOTUS

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,863

    SAF gets heavyweight support in carry case motion to SCOTUS

    The Bellevue-based Second Amendment Foundation is getting some heavyweight support in its petition to the Supreme Court for a Writ of Certiorari in a case challenging the gun permitting statute in the State of New York…

    http://www.examiner.com/article/heav...id=db_articles

  2. #2
    Regular Member 77zach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Marion County, FL
    Posts
    3,005
    As judge Benson Legg pointed out, the existence of a right is all one needs to exercise it. Next case.

    I wonder why semi automatic rifles will be a "tough nut to crack" when Heller already cracked it.
    Last edited by 77zach; 02-14-2013 at 12:18 PM.
    “If the natural tendencies of mankind are so bad that it is not safe to permit people to be free, how is it that the tendencies of these organizers are always good? Do not the legislators and their appointed agents also belong to the human race? Or do they believe that they themselves are made of a finer clay than the rest of mankind? ” -Bastiat

    I don't "need" to openly carry a handgun or own an "assault weapon" any more than Rosa Parks needed a seat on the bus.

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by 77zach View Post
    As judge Benson Legg pointed out, the existence of a right is all one needs to exercise it. Next case.

    I wonder why semi automatic rifles will be a "tough nut to crack" when Heller already cracked it.
    Because there are commies and fascists everywhere?

  4. #4
    Campaign Veteran MAC702's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    6,520
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Because there are commies and fascists everywhere?
    "It's not important how many people I've killed. What's important is how I get along with the people who are still alive" - Jimmy the Tulip

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    SEMO, , USA
    Posts
    578
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Workman View Post
    The Bellevue-based Second Amendment Foundation is getting some heavyweight support in its petition to the Supreme Court for a Writ of Certiorari in a case challenging the gun permitting statute in the State of New York…

    http://www.examiner.com/article/heav...id=db_articles

    Dave,

    Do you think the same argument could be used in my state of Missouri to force preemption? Since Article 1 Section 23 of the Missouri Bill Of Rights states

    Right to keep and bear arms--exception.

    Section 23. That the right of every citizen to keep and bear arms in defense of his home, person and property, or when lawfully summoned in aid of the civil power, shall not be questioned; but this shall not justify the wearing of concealed weapons.
    While it has been decided by our state Supreme Court, that this Section does not prohibit the State from granting permission to conceal carry it would seem that the Section codifies that "open" carry( if concealed is specifically named as "not justified" that only leaves openly) as an enumerated right. If this is the case then, shouldn't that restrict the state from allowing individual municipalities to disallow or restrict OC by local statute?

    I would appreciate your thoughts on this.
    AUDE VIDE TACE

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    No. They are asking to be heard.

    Interesting that Alabama's AG signed on. Alabama currently has "may issue," which is the heart of the complaint! Of course, there is a bill before the legislature to get that fixed. Don't know whether it is close to passing or even a possibility.

    Last year, it was a miserable failure on the part of those who claimed to "own" the movement. Hopefully, DefendAlabama will get this one passed.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    SEMO, , USA
    Posts
    578
    Well, I guess Dave is to busy writing and then pimping his new Examiner articles to come back and actually answer any questions his old ones may have raised. I have, generally, shied away from Examiner articles linked in a first post, since I felt it was just a ploy to make the OP some cash(Examiner stories pay the author based on number of hits). I guess it's time to return to that practice.

    Very disappointed in you Mr. Workman. You have shown me were your your true priorities lie....your wallet.
    AUDE VIDE TACE

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    I made a similar observation some time back--and got slapped down rather harshly for it.

    Is he a forum participant, or is he "selling" his product?

    *waits to be slapped down again*

  9. #9
    Regular Member MKEgal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    in front of my computer, WI
    Posts
    4,426
    Maybe he hasn't checked back here.
    Did you PM him?
    Quote Originally Posted by MLK, Jr
    The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort & convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge & controversy.
    Quote Originally Posted by MSG Laigaie
    Citizenship is a verb.
    Quote Originally Posted by Proverbs 27:12
    A prudent person foresees the danger ahead and takes precautions.
    The simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences.
    Quote Originally Posted by Proverbs 31:17
    She dresses herself with strength and makes her arms strong.

  10. #10
    Regular Member DrakeZ07's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Lexington, Ky
    Posts
    1,107
    Quote Originally Posted by MAC702 View Post
    Oh, nice one! Do you think there'll be one for the next Republican President who makes unconstitutional agenda's and remarks? I do hope so! Maybe it'll be something from Stalin. I like how a Democrat is placed on a edited image that once showed a Nazi Brownshirt. Very imaginative indeed!
    I'm a proud openly gay open carrier~
    Trained SKYWARN spotter, and veteran Storm Chaser.
    =^.^= ~<3~ =^.^=
    Beware the Pink Camo clad gay redneck.

  11. #11
    Regular Member DamonK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Ft. Lewis, WA
    Posts
    585

    Re: SAF gets heavyweight support in carry case motion to SCOTUS

    Quote Originally Posted by DrakeZ07 View Post
    Oh, nice one! Do you think there'll be one for the next Republican President who makes unconstitutional agenda's and remarks? I do hope so! Maybe it'll be something from Stalin. I like how a Democrat is placed on a edited image that once showed a Nazi Brownshirt. Very imaginative indeed!
    It doesn't matter what party he claims. And it wont matter with the next guy. Espouse marxist propaganda and attack our rights and you will find your way into a poster! I wish it was a jail cell, but that'll never happen

    Sent from my DROID4 using Tapatalk 2

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    SEMO, , USA
    Posts
    578
    Quote Originally Posted by MKEgal View Post
    Maybe he hasn't checked back here.
    Did you PM him?
    I don't think he has checked back, that's my point. He seems to be more interested in posting a link to his articles, which pays him per hit, than actually engaging in discussion of the topic he brings up. I have checked his profile and shows he has posted in other threads. He just doesn't seem to be interested in threads that he started.

    To answer your other question, I have not tried to PM him. If he can't be bothered to follow a thread he started, then I am not interested in his opinion on the subject anymore.
    AUDE VIDE TACE

  13. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Quote Originally Posted by SavageOne View Post
    ...If he can't be bothered to follow a thread he started, then I am not interested in his opinion on the subject anymore...
    Exactly.

    I get the impression that, even thought most of us here would agree with most of what he writes, he wants to face no challenges to the ideas his articles.

    If he does not have the stones to rationally discuss his written ideas, I have no desire to read them.
    Last edited by eye95; 02-22-2013 at 08:29 AM.

  14. #14
    Regular Member 77zach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Marion County, FL
    Posts
    3,005
    Quote Originally Posted by SavageOne View Post
    I don't think he has checked back, that's my point. He seems to be more interested in posting a link to his articles, which pays him per hit, than actually engaging in discussion of the topic he brings up. I have checked his profile and shows he has posted in other threads. He just doesn't seem to be interested in threads that he started.

    To answer your other question, I have not tried to PM him. If he can't be bothered to follow a thread he started, then I am not interested in his opinion on the subject anymore.
    This seems ridiculous to me. It's not like you get rich from Examiner articles. Maybe he just wants to disseminate information he feels is important to gun rights? Writing your own columns does more for the movement than posting on this forum.
    Last edited by 77zach; 02-22-2013 at 10:36 AM.
    “If the natural tendencies of mankind are so bad that it is not safe to permit people to be free, how is it that the tendencies of these organizers are always good? Do not the legislators and their appointed agents also belong to the human race? Or do they believe that they themselves are made of a finer clay than the rest of mankind? ” -Bastiat

    I don't "need" to openly carry a handgun or own an "assault weapon" any more than Rosa Parks needed a seat on the bus.

  15. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063

    SAF gets heavyweight support in carry case motion to SCOTUS

    True. But when he posts them here, he should have the consideration to participate in the discussion that posting it here starts.

    A column is not a back-and-forth. It is a one-way communication. Posting is two-way, yet he makes it one-way in an almost drive-by fashion. I can't respect that.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

    <o>

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    SEMO, , USA
    Posts
    578
    Quote Originally Posted by 77zach View Post
    This seems ridiculous to me. It's not like you get rich from Examiner articles. Maybe he just wants to disseminate information he feels is important to gun rights? Writing your own columns does more for the movement than posting on this forum.

    No, l doubt he is getting rich, but he's not doing it for free either. From what I can find the pay scale seems to be about a 1/4 cent per hit( it was as high as 1˘ until last year). Many of the column writers say the topic also drives the amount of hits. Do you think placing an article about gun rights on a pro gun site will garner more or fewer hits? So let's see


    4 hits = 1˘

    400 hits = $1.00

    4000 hits = $100.00

    OCDC = thousands of members


    I am not saying Mr. Workman's only intent is money( he is obviously a talented writer, who is passionate about gun rights), but I don't see him linking his Gun Week articles here, to disseminate that knowledge. What does bother me is, as it has been already described, the "drive-by" fashion he just starts a thread, and then feels no need follow up on it. He seems interested in stirring thought and discussion, just not participating in it
    AUDE VIDE TACE

  17. #17
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    I have met Dave, he lives here in Washington and has come to our OC meets. We often disagree but he is a good guy. He is passionate about firearms and does respond sometimes to his threads or to threads in our state, I don't think his posting is simply about making money, I think he just wants to share info or thoughts we might be interested in, I too wish he would have a little more back and forth in the discussions though.

    I have seen him change his stance and position on some matters because of us OC folks so he is and does read our responses at times. He mentioned some of my experiences in an examiner article and in his new book on Washington Gun rights.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  18. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    I am sure that he has responded to one or two of his threads that post his articles. I don't remember ever seeing a one. And this is not the first, second, or third time that I have commented about his lack of replies to concerns people raise about his articles.

    No, I don't think that he is doing it for the money. I do think he is doing it for the increase in readership, to encourage folks to click the link and go to his articles. There is nothing wrong with that. My point all along has been that, if he is going to post his articles in an interactive forum, he ought to routinely interact with users who comment on his articles. It is arrogant not to do so.

    It is not arrogant to post articles and not address comments on it. Articles are presumed to be one-way conversations. It is arrogant to post those same words on an interactive forum and then ignore comments. It is like making pronouncements from on high, which we are expected to read and accept, our thoughts on the matter meaning nothing to him, while his ideas are supposed to be meaningful to us.

    Well, until and unless he is willing to routinely interact with us about his articles, I won't read them; his thoughts mean nothing to me if he is not willing to discuss them.

    So, Dave, what are your thoughts on this?

    *waits*

    *expects nothing*

  19. #19
    Regular Member DamonK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Ft. Lewis, WA
    Posts
    585

    Re: SAF gets heavyweight support in carry case motion to SCOTUS

    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    I am sure that he has responded to one or two of his threads that post his articles. I don't remember ever seeing a one. And this is not the first, second, or third time that I have commented about his lack of replies to concerns people raise about his articles.

    No, I don't think that he is doing it for the money. I do think he is doing it for the increase in readership, to encourage folks to click the link and go to his articles. There is nothing wrong with that. My point all along has been that, if he is going to post his articles in an interactive forum, he ought to routinely interact with users who comment on his articles. It is arrogant not to do so.

    It is not arrogant to post articles and not address comments on it. Articles are presumed to be one-way conversations. It is arrogant to post those same words on an interactive forum and then ignore comments. It is like making pronouncements from on high, which we are expected to read and accept, our thoughts on the matter meaning nothing to him, while his ideas are supposed to be meaningful to us.

    Well, until and unless he is willing to routinely interact with us about his articles, I won't read them; his thoughts mean nothing to me if he is not willing to discuss them.

    So, Dave, what are your thoughts on this?

    *waits*

    *expects nothing*
    Here's a crazy idea... How about you stop attacking people that are on our side. Why don't you use all of this venom that you seem to build up inside on someone that wants to take our rights away instead of constantly squabbling with other people within your own movement. The way you present yourself is very divisive. When you are being helpful, you can give some pretty good advice. But you through all that good away when you try to instigate fights within our own movement.

    Sent from my DROID4 using Tapatalk 2
    Last edited by DamonK; 02-23-2013 at 11:45 AM.

  20. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063

    SAF gets heavyweight support in carry case motion to SCOTUS

    I am not attacking anyone. I am questioning a behavior and explaining my reaction to it--in the hope that the behavior of this ally changes in a way that is helpful to the movement.

    BTW, examine your post. Aren't you exhibiting the self-same behavior towards me? If you believe that you should criticize the behavior of an ally, why do you not believe that I should???


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

    <o>

  21. #21
    Regular Member DamonK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Ft. Lewis, WA
    Posts
    585

    Re: SAF gets heavyweight support in carry case motion to SCOTUS

    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    I am not attacking anyone. I am questioning a behavior and explaining my reaction to it--in the hope that the behavior of this ally changes in a way that is helpful to the movement.

    BTW, examine your post. Aren't you exhibiting the self-same behavior towards me? If you believe that you should criticize the behavior of an ally, why do you not believe that I should???


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

    <o>
    He's already very helpful to us. And I would imagine a fairly busy guy. Whether or not he chooses to return and participate in a discussion is a mute point.

    As far as the self-same thing goes, I'm pointing out your destructive behavior. I'm not arguing with.

    Sent from my DROID4 using Tapatalk 2

  22. #22
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Quote Originally Posted by DamonK View Post
    He's already very helpful to us. And I would imagine a fairly busy guy. Whether or not he chooses to return and participate in a discussion is a mute point.

    As far as the self-same thing goes, I'm pointing out your destructive behavior. I'm not arguing with.

    Sent from my DROID4 using Tapatalk 2
    Moot to you, not to me. I see it as arrogance.

  23. #23
    Regular Member DamonK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Ft. Lewis, WA
    Posts
    585

    Re: SAF gets heavyweight support in carry case motion to SCOTUS

    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    Moot to you, not to me. I see it as arrogance.
    Ever stop to consider that maybe not everything is judged by how you see it? Do you get angry at reporters when you yell at them on tv? No one has an obligation to do things the way you want them to. Get over yourself.

    Sent from my DROID4 using Tapatalk 2

  24. #24
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Quote Originally Posted by DamonK View Post
    Ever stop to consider that maybe not everything is judged by how you see it? Do you get angry at reporters when you yell at them on tv? No one has an obligation to do things the way you want them to. Get over yourself.

    Sent from my DROID4 using Tapatalk 2
    Again, don't you see exactly what you criticize in your own words?

    I don't expect anyone to act in any particular way based upon my words. I am expressing an opinion. That is all. It seems to be you who is getting worked up.

    Anyway, you are the last person I expect anything from based on my posts here, so I'll just move on to discussions with others. Feel free to project once more. I won't respond.

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    SEMO, , USA
    Posts
    578
    Quote Originally Posted by DamonK View Post
    He's already very helpful to us. And I would imagine a fairly busy guy. Whether or not he chooses to return and participate in a discussion is a mute point.

    As far as the self-same thing goes, I'm pointing out your destructive behavior. I'm not arguing with.

    Sent from my DROID4 using Tapatalk 2

    I don't believe it to be a moot point at all. If Mr. Workman wishes to pass on his information and thoughts without having to deal with other's input and comments, then he should post them in the blog area of this site. This is the forum section and by definition implies discussion.

    For the record, I am also a busy person, but I still show the other members of this forum the courtesy of interacting with them when I start a thread.
    AUDE VIDE TACE

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •