-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
NRA Calls Out DOJ
- Thread starter oak1971
- Start date
apierce918
Regular Member
Pretty clear to me
Outdoorsman1
Regular Member
EXCELLENT...... YEEEE HAAAWWW.......:banana: :banana: :banana: :banana:
It is obvious "they" will not listen to us, so MAYBE they will listen to the NRA...
I also like all the "cc's" at the bottom of the letter....
Thanks for posting and making my day....
Outdoorsman1
It is obvious "they" will not listen to us, so MAYBE they will listen to the NRA...
I also like all the "cc's" at the bottom of the letter....
Thanks for posting and making my day....
Outdoorsman1
Last edited:
HandyHamlet
Regular Member
To all the DOJ fan boys.
Nice post dude!
Love the bit about the DOJ demanding hands on training. So my Utah permit class would NOT meet the DOJs illegal tampering with state law. Interesting. Good thing I took the NRA course too. Just to be sure.
So Paul. Can your upcoming lawsuit(s) against the DOJ be class action? Or did we cover this already? Or should I just wait for WCInc to file?
Outdoorsman1
Regular Member
Snip...
Mr. H. Hamlet wrote....
From what I have read, Paul's "lawsuit" will be regarding the DOJ not accepting the Maryland Online Course as meeting the requierments already listed. If you are going to use either your Utah Permit or the NRA Basic Pistol Certificate then you would be exempt from any class action filed (unless the DOJ rejects them as well).
As IANAL, and aslo IANPF, I as always, could be wrong.... But hey.. it sounded good in my brain....
Maybe I missed my calling... either a lawyer or a bullshi+er.... or I suppose they could be one in the same....
Outdoorsman1
Mr. H. Hamlet wrote....
From what I have read, Paul's "lawsuit" will be regarding the DOJ not accepting the Maryland Online Course as meeting the requierments already listed. If you are going to use either your Utah Permit or the NRA Basic Pistol Certificate then you would be exempt from any class action filed (unless the DOJ rejects them as well).
As IANAL, and aslo IANPF, I as always, could be wrong.... But hey.. it sounded good in my brain....
Maybe I missed my calling... either a lawyer or a bullshi+er.... or I suppose they could be one in the same....
Outdoorsman1
Last edited:
Interceptor_Knight
Regular Member
Looks like the NRA is going to be eating some crow when the admin code is released. The DOJ IS NOT going to require "hands on" firearms training. Act 35 explicitly forbids this. What the DOJ is planning to require is "face-to-face" training. Apples with Astronauts....
There was never a doubt that any NRA firearms training would qualify.
Last edited:
HandyHamlet
Regular Member
10-4 good buddy.
I guess I'll start my own lawsuit. Or wait for WCInc?
Seems like it's written in English to me.
Outdoorsman1
Regular Member
Snip...
The Honerable Mr. H. Hamlet wrote....
Hey if you need representation just let me know... I am thinking about embarking on a new profession (had trouble spelling career)... I can see it now.... Me on TV with one of the honerable lawyer commercials... Call 1-800-BULLSHI+ to speak directly to my voice mail... Outdoorsman1 for all your legal needs... I may not be licensed , but I don't care if you don't care.....
Outdoorsman1
The Honerable Mr. H. Hamlet wrote....
Hey if you need representation just let me know... I am thinking about embarking on a new profession (had trouble spelling career)... I can see it now.... Me on TV with one of the honerable lawyer commercials... Call 1-800-BULLSHI+ to speak directly to my voice mail... Outdoorsman1 for all your legal needs... I may not be licensed , but I don't care if you don't care.....
Outdoorsman1
Last edited:
Interceptor_Knight
Regular Member
175.60(2)(b) is not violated by requiring face-to-face training or specific information from being present on a "proof of training" certificate.
HandyHamlet
Regular Member
As your first and most loyal client I humbly suggest you copyrite that ASAP!
Last edited:
It's not necessarily violated, but it does give DOJ the burden of showing that every requirement it imposes is authorized by a duty the statute assigns to DOJ. And I haven't found anything in DOJ's authority under Act 35 that would justify a face-to-face training requirement.
Outdoorsman1
Regular Member
Snip...
Copied the right way.....
There.. consider it copy righted.... Thanks for the suggestion...'
As you will be my first client I will work Pro-Bono (Just DO NOT ask me to work Chaz Bono)( where is the hurling smiley when you need him).....as my fee compensation will be the vast word of mouth to future customers that you will be able to amply provide...
Outdoorsman1
Copied the right way.....
There.. consider it copy righted.... Thanks for the suggestion...'
As you will be my first client I will work Pro-Bono (Just DO NOT ask me to work Chaz Bono)( where is the hurling smiley when you need him).....as my fee compensation will be the vast word of mouth to future customers that you will be able to amply provide...
Outdoorsman1
Last edited:
HandyHamlet
Regular Member
One thing I do have is a big mouth.
And since it is time for my mid afternoon nap I think a little music is in order.
For your listening pleasure...
[video=youtube;I5YeIiLkhnc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5YeIiLkhnc[/video]
And since it is time for my mid afternoon nap I think a little music is in order.
For your listening pleasure...
[video=youtube;I5YeIiLkhnc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5YeIiLkhnc[/video]
H
Herr Heckler Koch
Guest
Well done to the NRA! Late and expensive, but kudos.
Interceptor_Knight
Regular Member
The burden is on the NRA, WCI, etc legal team to prove that it is not within the DOJ's scope of authority to create Admin Code and practices should they file suit.
There are other options. The Governor can bounce the rule back to DOJ before it goes to the Legislature's Joint Committee for the Review of Administrative Rules. Once the Governor lets it through, lawmakers get to review it, ask questions, and stop it if they don't like it. I agree that in litigation the burden would be on the plaintiffs....let's hope it gets fixed long before that.
Secondly, the Act does not establish an expiration date for the training. Thus, a
person with otherwise valid documentation of training may not be able to submit that
documentation with an application because it does not meet DOJ's form or content
requirements, and the person may no longer be able to locate the trainer (who could have
moved or retired for example) to have him or her update the documentation.
This is the part that I need to stick!! I went through training in 2008 with an instructor that was both NRA and WI certified...If the DOJ requires additional information on my certificate I would be SOL...I can not locate the instructor!!
person with otherwise valid documentation of training may not be able to submit that
documentation with an application because it does not meet DOJ's form or content
requirements, and the person may no longer be able to locate the trainer (who could have
moved or retired for example) to have him or her update the documentation.
This is the part that I need to stick!! I went through training in 2008 with an instructor that was both NRA and WI certified...If the DOJ requires additional information on my certificate I would be SOL...I can not locate the instructor!!
The obvious approach would be to grandfather in all prior training, and apply the new criteria only to training that takes place after the rule becomes law.
rcawdor57
Campaign Veteran
Great Post! No Bashing The NRA Yet?
Thanks Rob. I just read the entire document. I wonder why there hasn't been the usual bashing of the NRA??
Imagine if the NRA had 80 MILLION members (the guestimate at the number of legal gun owners in the U.S.) instead of 4.5 million. That would be a force to be reckoned with.
I hope this compels some of you to join the NRA. We may not like everything they do but we do need their support.
NRA member since 1978. NRA Endowment member since 1988.
Thanks Rob. I just read the entire document. I wonder why there hasn't been the usual bashing of the NRA??
Imagine if the NRA had 80 MILLION members (the guestimate at the number of legal gun owners in the U.S.) instead of 4.5 million. That would be a force to be reckoned with.
I hope this compels some of you to join the NRA. We may not like everything they do but we do need their support.
NRA member since 1978. NRA Endowment member since 1988.