Hey Gray,
You are critical of us but you have not cited your own work. Why not? Is your body of work that poor? Or, let me guess, you don't have any notable victories under belt?
Chan et al v. City of Seattle et al, co-plaintiff on state court case against the Seattle's park gun ban rule, which violated state preemption. State Superior Court judge also ruled it a violation of constitutional rights under both the state and federal constitution.
NRA/SAF v. State of Washington Along with one other (Jared on this forum), did the critical historical legal research for striking down the Washington State Alien Firearm License law, as AFL's were not being issued due to state law requiring an FBI background check, and the FBI not allowing the state Department of Licensing access to it's record checks. The Legislature refused to fix the problem so they sued as soon as
Heller occurred. Attorney General consented to an injunction, and the Legislature mostly repealed the law (now only effects H1B's and L1's who actually reside in Washington).
Educated numerous law enforcement agencies in the states of Washington and Oregon, and originally started the "training advisory" method of stopping bad open carry encounter before they actually start so that law enforcement officers know what the actual statute is and what their responsibilities are under the 5th amendment. The Washington State Criminal Justice Training Center (the state's police academy) is using training advisories prompted and authored by myself. This is especially important in the state of Washington due to their statutes about "warranting alarm". This method is being used in numerous states, such as Michigan, Pennsylvania, Connecticut, and yes, California.
Educated and persuaded the San Mateo Sheriff's office to drop all unlawful requirements, such as a two-track licensing system which requires application to a local PD chief, when if he thinks good cause is there, passing on to the sheriff (you can now just apply direct to the sheriff, which is what the law says); charging all fees up front (they only charge the fingerprinting fee up front now but none of the licensing fee, but once you get fingerprinted, they can't do it again for initial applicants); liability insurance requirement is gone; gun registration requirement is gone; no more regulation of what types of firearms you can put on a permit (just must be pistol, revolver, or "other firearm); no limit on the number of guns you can place on the license; good cause is now no longer out of reach for the normal citizen in that county.
Educated and persuaded the Riverside County Sheriff's Office to drop the unlawful "you must attempt to apply to a city PD" requirement for city residents, as well as unlawful forms. They only collect $20 up front for consider your good cause instead of the full $100 dollars.
If you are not "conlaw" qualified then give your opinions in a dignified way and lets have a cordial conversation. You don't use profane language, but your methods are irritating, snarky, and weasally. Lets have a disagreement and move on. Don't be nasty about it (your words aren't, but your tactics are).
Yes Gura has delivered in a big way. Two huge cases. He is a God, so-to-speak.
Where are the other cases from you and yours?
2-0 is a great record. Where are the other cases. I have been listening to crap like yours for 30 years. Excepting Gura's one victory for Californians, not much has happened since then here in California (I know, Heller was a stepping stone for McDonald; you don't have to snark that statement). I know CGF was instrumental in "shall issue" in Sacramento. At this rate, I may be able to carry a gun in CA with a CCW in fifty years! (don't snark this statement; this is a blog for God's sake).
Carry Cases:
Richards v. Prieto formerly
Sykes v. Mcginness, challenge to good cause and good moral character provisions of the California carry law. Represented by Alan Gura and co-plaintiffed by SAF and CGF.
Palmer v. District of Columbia, challenge to the District of Columbia carry ban and ban on non-resident possession of handguns in the district. Represented by Alan Gura and co-plaintiffed by SAF
Bateman v. Perdue, challenge to the North Carolina emergency powers carry ban act. Represented by Alan Gura and co-plaintiffed by SAF and Grassroots North Carolina's legal foundation arm.
Woollard v. Sheridan, challenge to the Maryland "good and substantial reason to carry a gun" law. Represented by Alan Gura and co-plaintiffed by SAF.
Kachalsky v. Cacace, challenge to New York's "proper cause" requirement. Represented by Alan Gura and co-plaintiffed by SAF.
Muller v. Maenza, broad facial challenge to NJ's carry ban and licensing law. Represented by David Jensen of Duane Morris LLP and co-plaintiffed by SAF and ANJRPC.
Mishiga v. Monken, challenge to the refusal of Illinois to issue a FOID to a resident of Ohio so that she may possess a firearm in the home of her friend (state law doesn't allow this as the law only allows loaded carry in guest rooms for people who have licensing or registration for the firearm, which Ohio doesn't have). Represented by James Manley of the Mountain States Legal Foundation
Bonidy v. United States Postal Service, challenge to postal service regulations banning all carry on all postal property, including parking lots. They seek a strikedown of the regulation so that they can possess in their vehicle. Represented by James Manley of the Mountain States Legal Foundation
GeorgiaCarry.org v. Toomer Challenge to non-residents of Georgia being unable to acquire a Georgia Weapons license. Represented by John Monroe of GeorgiaCarry.org, currently in the 11th Circuit on standing issues.
GeorgiaCarry.org v. State of Georgia Challenge to church carry ban passed by Georgia after repealing their public gathering law. Represented by John Monroe of GeorgiaCarry.org
Wisconsin Carry Inc v. Doyle, Challenge to the 1000 foot school zones law in Wisconsin. Represented by John Monroe of GCO and local counsel.
D'Cruz v. McCraw, challenge to Texas prohibition on non-military persons 18-21 from getting a carry license. Represented by Charles Cooper of Cooper-Kirk and co-plaintiffed by the National Rifle Association.
Peterson v. LaCabe, challenge to a prohibition on non-Colorado residents acquiring carry licenses in Colorado so that one can carry in Denver if they reside in 22 states which doesn't recognize Colorado's licenses. Represented by John Monroe (yes, this is my case).
I have not read where Gura has been critical of Bigtoe, if he has not, please stop dropping his name (use citations please when adding someone elses name to your opinions).
There are numerous youtube videos where he is critical of pro-se cases and other poorly filed cases involving strategic civil rights litigation. Let's just say this: Gura himself could call up Kevin and tell him that he's interfering with the strategic civil litigation plans to get carry for all Americans, including Californians, and Kevin will refuse because he's intransigent and believes that somehow his case will free him from oppression faster than a properly lawyered
Richards case will do the same when it gets to the 9th. I tried being persuasive, Gene tried being persuasive, and Alan himself could call him up (if he wasn't so busy with doing the numerous other cases dealing with right to carry among other subjects) and Kevin will continue to be intransigent. He doesn't understand that the Civil Rights Movement 50 years ago first went for desegregating interstate bus companies before going for interracial marriage (suing a school to be able to carry).
He wants his rights "vindicated" to where he can open carry a non-functional firearm, by suing a school. He's not a sympathetic plaintiff, he's not suing the Sheriff of San Francisco (who he should be suing if he sued anyone) for refusing to issue him a carry license so he can carry an actual functional firearm statewide. Judges read newspapers and watch TV, where they show videos of Columbine.....
CGF helped Elsensei, but they did not go for the throat! They should have stripped qualified immunity from the cops invlolved.
The way qualified immunity works is that they have "one bite" of the qualified immunity apple on the same issue. If the San Diego PD office pulls the same or something similar to what happened with Sam (El Sensei) with someone, they will have no qualified immunity. Here on forward, when it comes to bad OC stops, there is no immunity for any officer for doing it. They will stay clear.
You are part of what you feel is an elite cadre and you want to protect it (just my gut feeling by reading your snarky remarks).
No, I just don't want to have the judge in my case (
Peterson v. LaCabe citing not only
Peruta, but also
Hall v. Garcia, and
Birdt v. Beck as well in a loss. It has nothing to do with being "elite", it's not wanting to see the work I put into my case get flushed down the toilet by people filing pro-se cases in bad venues like San Francisco and Los Angeles. California Northern District is filled with "Living Constitution" freaks who have no business sitting in a court chamber, and statist law and order conservatives who can't stand the idea of normal people being able to carry.
Gray, stop making this stuff personal. We don't owe you. Please act like a dignified lawyer; you are supposed to be better than us.
I'm not a lawyer, I'm just a guy who doesn't want all of the hard work being put into his own case in Colorado and the rights of 28 million people in California being flushed down the toilet by the foolish actions of people like Kevin and Jon.
