DPS Accountability Fund

Money is being raised to bring legal action against the DPS for their ongoing and unlawful activities at the capitol.

DPS Accountability Fund
https://www.gofundme.com/uez59h8

"We have contracted with the Law Offices of Millie Thompson who is willing to work on a contingency basis (donating her time unless we win) to take our case and finally hold DPS accountable. However, we need to raise money to pay for the paralegal and any costs associated with filing the suit."

The activist arrest count just at the capitol is up to something like 9, and I believe as many as 7 cases have been dropped. At least two are currently pending. This fund will go towards holding them accountable for their unlawful actions targeting political activists.

and this has what to do with OC??

ipse

solus said:

and this has what to do with OC??

ipse

Click to expand...

Are you serious?

What does a lawsuit for unlawful arrests of open carry activists have to do with open carry?

Did you read the campaign description? Do you want me to copy and paste it here so that you're spared the incredible burden of having to click a link?

"Region VII DPS (Capitol Complex) has been violating the rights of gun rights advocates for far too long. Since September 2013, there have been nine arrests at the Capitol, most recently in April 2015.

Initially, the arrests centered on the lawful carry of pre-1899, antique or curio, black powder revolvers.

Then, they began arresting people for merely having realistic-looking black powder revolvers in holsters.

Now, they are arresting law abiding citizens exercising their right to symbolic protest for merely having a chunk of rubber in a holster that resembles a gun (blue training pistols). The most recent two arrests were for plastic or rubber "guns." In one case, they even broke the ribs of one advocate who was doing nothing more than sitting cross legged on the ground, refusing to speak.

DPS troopers have demonstrated over and over again that they are willing and able to arrest Texans fighting for gun rights. Their leaders have testified against pro-gun bills. Their investigators have given free passes to body guards of gun control groups who assault gun rights advocates. Where laws don't exist they have either invented them or resorted to simple bullying techniques and charged us with "criminal trespassing" for daring to ask what crime we were committing to be legally asked to leave a public space.

We've tried using the system to force them through pressure and advocacy to do the right thing. We've tried meeting with and calling leadership. We've asked the Attorney General for assistance. Now that they are resorting to arresting people for having plastic, dollar store toys that look like guns the time has come to use legal means to seek justice.

These Texans have paid out thousands of dollars in bonds, attorney's fees, time and fuel fighting to have the charges dismissed or the cases brought to court. All but the most recent two arrests have had their charges dropped because no crime was committed. This hasn't stopped DPS from continuing to squash the 1st and 2nd Amendment rights of Texans on the tip of the spear for gun rights this legislative session.

We need your help to right this wrong. We have contracted with the Law Offices of Millie Thompson who is willing to work on a contingency basis (donating her time unless we win) to take our case and finally hold DPS accountable. However, we need to raise money to pay for the paralegal and any costs associated with filing the suit.

This lawsuit affects YOU because, without it, DPS continues to feel empowered to violate your rights just because they can. It's time we restored the power where it belongs in Texas - with the people. It's time we demand that our law enforcement honor their oath and obey the law and the Constitution.

If you donate to help with this lawsuit and we win a cash settlement, your donation will be refunded to you after attorneys fees (please ensure you use a valid email address). Any money left over after paying back our donors will be split among litigants equally to reimburse legal expenses. We don't expect and we aren't asking for money...we want justice. Most of the money, if any, paid out to complainants will be donated to gun rights charities in Texas, including Open Carry Texas, Texas Carry, and Lone Star Gun Rights to continue the fight for your rights in Texas."

Hopefully this answers your question, because I'm putting the baby spoon up now.

stealthyeliminator said:

"We have contracted with the Law Offices of Millie Thompson who is willing to work on a contingency basis (donating her time unless we win) to take our case and finally hold DPS accountable. However, we need to raise money to pay for the paralegal ..."...

Click to expand...

What does the paralegal do that the lawyer can't do? My initial reaction is that the attorney is willing to put her name to it, as long as a paid paralegal does all the work, and she still gets paid if you win. How much manpower goes into cases like this? What exactly is the attorney donating except a few signatures?

I'm not being sarcastic; I'm actually asking the question because of my initial perception. Would love to hear that I'm wrong.

Can you provide your own paralegal or someone that runs the errands that don't require a college degree?

What do you estimate the costs to be for moving this forward all the way? How about for the initial filings?

quote Since September 2013, there have been nine arrests at the Capitol, most recently in April 2015. unquote

let's see, stealth, if i remember isn't the Texas legislature contemplating revising status of OC'g and attaching it to the privilege card , therefore making this fund generation a mute point?

let me read your propaganda piece again...yepper...it is about only about N I N E arrests of OC'ers in the past.

let me go back and once again i remember you venomously, strenuously, and contemptuously argued the texas legislature would pass a constitutionally OC statute. of course your rhetoric changed when the BEST the citizens are going to get is attached to your concealed privilege card.

it is a scam pushed under the emotionalism of 2A fervor and your propagating the scam and should be ashamed. especially since while you insult my reading comprehension, you have absolutely no concept where the devil your critical thinking skills have gone.

let's see how did i word my post...oh ya, who cares.

ipse

addendum...did i miss your push for a fund me for the LG carriers who got into judicial trouble at the misdirection of the texas organizers ???

gutshot said:

I just sent a donation from Ky. Thank you all for the work that you have done and the risks that you took. I don't care if it is about 9 arrests or 900 arrests. It was too many whatever the number. There are those here that will look for any insignificant reason to convince themselves that they can avoid giving anything to you. I hope there are enough decent people that will gladly contribute something and be grateful for the opportunity to be a part of this historic effort. Well done. sic semper tyrannis

Click to expand...

Thank you!

MAC702 said:

What does the paralegal do that the lawyer can't do? My initial reaction is that the attorney is willing to put her name to it, as long as a paid paralegal does all the work, and she still gets paid if you win. How much manpower goes into cases like this? What exactly is the attorney donating except a few signatures?

I'm not being sarcastic; I'm actually asking the question because of my initial perception. Would love to hear that I'm wrong.

Can you provide your own paralegal or someone that runs the errands that don't require a college degree?

What do you estimate the costs to be for moving this forward all the way? How about for the initial filings?

Click to expand...

I don't know what the workload division or delegations will look like within the firm.

As far as I know, the amount the campaign is for is the full amount that will be requested for the suit.

solus said:

let's see, stealth, if i remember isn't the Texas legislature contemplating revising status of OC'g and attaching it to the privilege card , therefore making this fund generation a mute point?

Click to expand...

Passing licensed OC wouldn't make this a mute point.

solus said:

let me read your propaganda piece again...yepper...it is about only about N I N E arrests of OC'ers in the past.

Click to expand...

Nine is an insignificant number, unworthy of justice? No? Then what's your point?

solus said:

let me go back and once again i remember you venomously, strenuously, and contemptuously argued the texas legislature would pass a constitutionally OC statute. of course your rhetoric changed when the BEST the citizens are going to get is attached to your concealed privilege card.

Click to expand...

If you can find a quote of me stating that the Texas Legislature would without a doubt pass constitutional carry, please quote it, but not here, because it has nothing to do with this thread.

solus said:

it is a scam pushed under the emotionalism of 2A fervor and your propagating the scam and should be ashamed. especially since while you insult my reading comprehension, you have absolutely no concept where the devil your critical thinking skills have gone.

Click to expand...

You're accusing me of scamming. You need to post up the evidence, or you need to shut the **** up and gtfo of my thread. Also, I am reporting your post. If your post is moderated as a result, I will request that this post is additionally moderated such that the thread remains clean of your filth.

solus said:

let's see how did i word my post...oh ya, who cares.

Click to expand...

I care about this campaign... What I don't care about, is how much you don't care about this campaign.

solus said:

addendum...did i miss your push for a fund me for the LG carriers who got into judicial trouble at the misdirection of the texas organizers ???

Click to expand...

I don't know if I've posted links to fund for defense of LG OCers or not, but I'm unsure what the relevance of that fact would be.

Now, I'd appreciate it if you ceased your perceived need to follow me around the forum and occasionally interject your ridiculous, unbased insults and accusations.

MAC702 said:

What does the paralegal do that the lawyer can't do? My initial reaction is that the attorney is willing to put her name to it, as long as a paid paralegal does all the work, and she still gets paid if you win. How much manpower goes into cases like this? What exactly is the attorney donating except a few signatures?

Click to expand...

Paralegals do the grunt work. They research the case law and they are the ones who write the briefs. What they can't do is put their name on a brief or argue a case on behalf of anyone.

stealthyeliminator said:

Money is being raised to bring legal action against the DPS for their ongoing and unlawful activities at the capitol.

DPS Accountability Fund
https://www.gofundme.com/uez59h8

"We have contracted with the Law Offices of Millie Thompson who is willing to work on a contingency basis (donating her time unless we win) to take our case and finally hold DPS accountable. However, we need to raise money to pay for the paralegal and any costs associated with filing the suit."

The activist arrest count just at the capitol is up to something like 9, and I believe as many as 7 cases have been dropped. At least two are currently pending. This fund will go towards holding them accountable for their unlawful actions targeting political activists.

Click to expand...

Glad to be part of this. Your cause is just - fare thee well.

California Right To Carry said:

Paralegals do the grunt work. They research the case law and they are the ones who write the briefs. What they can't do is put their name on a brief or argue a case on behalf of anyone.

Click to expand...

Yes. So, what is involved in arguing the case? That's my question.

But I see now that the attorney would be doing the courtroom time on the contingency basis. Yes, that is significant, assuming it goes there.

Thanks.

oh gutshot, please oh please put money in my 'go fund me' account so i can become literate in the ways to beg money under the emotionalism of 2A causes.

my question centered on olde cases, where NINE individuals have been placed in judicial processes over an 18 month period. NOTHING is said of those individuals across the lonestar state, (specific numbers unknown), who by following the organizers guidance who told them to carry LGs and got themselves in to judicial trouble.

additionally, NINE were, according to the article, were OC'g. the premise of anymore folk being 'harassed' once the legislative body passes the privilege card OC'g provisions should be NILL.

what law is specifically going to be affected by this lawsuit that won't be preempted by the new statute?

finally, this article is an OP-Piece whose sole purpose is to sell the go fund me activity, as such, all the fact articulated in the article could be hyperbole or at best hearsay hyperbole.

did ya'l miss this sentence: quote: All but the most recent two arrests have had their charges dropped because no crime was committed. unquoted.

it is good to see the ponzi schemes are alive & well and David Hannum's comment about P.T. Barnum is still valid.

I would venture a guess you kind folk who freely give to these nebular type of causes wouldn't buy a McD gift card and hand to a homeless person as you believe they are unworthy.

call me whatever you want gutshot, et al., but my hard earned money isn't going to some shyster to keep their paralegals employed on a case where there were no charges for seven of the individuals and the remaining two probably not seen the judge yet to have the charges dropped.

ipse

Dear solus, the simple fact that you don't understand the purpose of a suit doesn't give justification for the accusations you hurl. The purpose is apparently clear enough to others, so I don't believe there is a lack of sufficient description to support one coming to understanding of the purpose. In fact, the described intent of this suit fits quite uniformly with the sentiments and motivations behind calls for lawsuits commonly expressed on this message board.

You are making accusations of ulterior motives, yet have presented nothing supportive of that claim. You've been asked to support your accusations, but rather than doing so you've just repeated them, and added additional personal insults.

Personally, I suspect you of intentionally trolling. Regardless, please stop cluttering my thread with your unsubstantiated, personally insulting crap.

The primary purpose of the law suit is to cause law enforcement to honor/obey the laws and stop charging people with the ride, even when there is no chance of doing the time.

solus said:

...what law is specifically going to be affected by this lawsuit that won't be preempted by the new statute?...

Click to expand...

Weren't they carrying arms that did not require the permit to start with? The new OC law, if it goes into effect, just grants the open option to those already privileged to carry modern sidearms. It would not stop harassment of those exercising their right to carry without a permit, even those arms not required to be permitted.

stealthyeliminator said:

Dear solus, the simple fact that you don't understand the purpose of a suit doesn't give justification for the accusations you hurl. The purpose is apparently clear enough to others, so I don't believe there is a lack of sufficient description to support one coming to understanding of the purpose. In fact, the described intent of this suit fits quite uniformly with the sentiments and motivations behind calls for lawsuits commonly expressed on this message board.

You are making accusations of ulterior motives, yet have presented nothing supportive of that claim. You've been asked to support your accusations, but rather than doing so you've just repeated them, and added additional personal insults.

Personally, I suspect you of intentionally trolling. Regardless, please stop cluttering my thread with your unsubstantiated, personally insulting crap.

Click to expand...

oh trust me i have articulated quite clearly, with objective evidence from the article, what this go fund me is about. you, as you are personally invested and apparently quite emotionally vested seem to have your hackles up and it seem to be almost like you are caught trying to defend something you yourself are not quite...

so truly, stealth, tell me straight out, what is the purpose of the suit and how is this suit going to 'hold DPS accountable'?

at this juncture, nobody, yourself included, has unequivocally stated what specifically this lawyer is pro bono their time for? (complete subjective hyperbole at this stage!) Let's see out of the nine, 7 were not charged!! (fact from your article) so objectively what is this lawyer's case to 'hold DPS accountable'?

quote: ...hold DPS accountable. unquote doesn't it seem to you this statement seems to lack any type of specificity on how this mythical excursion is going to hold anybody accountable? personally, i would love to watch ya'l walking into the judicial system saying...hey we are here to hold DPS accountable for its actions for the arrest of nine ppl over the last approximately two years...uh, ya you're right judge, uh, seven of the cases were dismissed w/no charges filed! but your honor...it has to do with 1 & 2 amendment stuff...oh, you don't care since there doesn't appear to be anything to hold DPS accountable for so your tossing us out on our ear?

so oh, emotionally charged one...please enlighten me on what this muddy piglet round up is going to specifically solve? be succinct and offer some sort of game plan on how this pro bono attorney is going to hold DPS accountable to solve...uh, what is the problem again?

you do realize stealth, ppl get arrested all the time and then the charges are dropped and yet i fail to see any consumer lawsuits holding any LE agency, who has immunity mind you, accountable?

now if your go fund me is actually a guise to defend the remaining OC'ers you might wish to visit the site as "Campaigns in defense of formal charges..." are not allowed.

now convince me, without the emotionally charged BS rhetoric, is truly about, cuz your article has more holes than a noodle strainer.

ipse

MAC702 said:

Weren't they carrying arms that did not require the permit to start with? The new OC law, if it goes into effect, just grants the open option to those already privileged to carry modern sidearms. It would not stop harassment of those exercising their right to carry without a permit, even those arms not required to be permitted.

Click to expand...

Actually, most recent arrest that comes to mind was for carrying a bluegun.