Some judges DO get it!

[rapgood]

A federal judge sitting in the Southern District of Illinois was recently confronted with a question about the constitutionality of a new Illinois law banning AR-15's. I agree that I'm stretching the rules here about something other than "open carry," but with Washington's new and similar law, the anti's are trying their best to outlaw ALL guns, which would certainly eviscerate the need to protect open carry. Here's the link to his order.
It is very well thought out and gets to the point (note his avoidance of referring to AR-15s as "assault rifles").
I haven't heard, so I don't know, if SAF is challenging the new WA law that apes the substance of the Illinois law.

 

[color of law]

A federal judge sitting in the Southern District of Illinois was recently confronted with a question about the constitutionality of a new Illinois law banning AR-15's. I agree that I'm stretching the rules here about something other than "open carry," but with Washington's new and similar law, the anti's are trying their best to outlaw ALL guns, which would certainly eviscerate the need to protect open carry. Here's the link to his order.
It is very well thought out and gets to the point (note his avoidance of referring to AR-15s as "assault rifles").
I haven't heard, so I don't know, if SAF is challenging the new WA law that apes the substance of the Illinois law.

The complete opposite of the ruling in the Northern District.

https://s3.amazonaws.com/jnswire/jns-media/b8/4f/12405468/bevis_v_naperville_tro_ruling_2-17-23.pdf

Amy Coney Barrett is going to Bit@h slap two female federal judges in northern Dist, of Ill. on their gun rulings.
A hearing before Barrett is to take place Monday for the district judges to explain themselves as to why they defied the supreme courts ruling in Heller and Bruen.

 

[rapgood]

The complete opposite of the ruling in the Northern District.

https://s3.amazonaws.com/jnswire/jns-media/b8/4f/12405468/bevis_v_naperville_tro_ruling_2-17-23.pdf

Amy Coney Barrett is going to Bit@h slap two female federal judges in northern Dist, of Ill. on their gun rulings.
A hearing before Barrett is to take place Monday for the district judges to explain themselves as to why they defied the supreme courts ruling in Heller and Bruen.

I see that you hold yourself out as an "Accomplished Advocate." By doing so, are you representing yourself as an attorney and admitted to one or more bar associations?

 

[color of law]

I see that you hold yourself out as an "Accomplished Advocate." By doing so, are you representing yourself as an attorney and admitted to one or more bar associations?

I don't hold myself out as an "Accomplished Advocate." That title was bestowed upon me by Grapeshot. I'm not sure how someone can represent themselves as an attorney. Hold themselves out as an attorney, maybe so. I have pointed out many times on this forum that I'm not an attorney. I hold myself to a higher standard.

 

[KBCraig]

I see that you hold yourself out as an "Accomplished Advocate." By doing so, are you representing yourself as an attorney and admitted to one or more bar associations?

Users cannot change their own forum titles. I don't think even moderators can change those; it's at the admin level.

 

[mlawson]

With Xenforo forum software, moderators cannot change members titles. This is done at the admin level.

 

[rapgood]

I don't hold myself out as an "Accomplished Advocate." That title was bestowed upon me by Grapeshot. I'm not sure how someone can represent themselves as an attorney. Hold themselves out as an attorney, maybe so. I have pointed out many times on this forum that I'm not an attorney. I hold myself to a higher standard.

Yaaawn. Yeah. Typical. You ridicule attorneys right up to the moment that you need one.

 

[color of law]

Yaaawn. Yeah. Typical. You ridicule attorneys right up to the moment that you need one.

You are a funny guy. https://scholar.google.com/scholar_...9,260,261,310,311,321,322,323,324,373,374,383
And

Gun owner’s lawsuit against city of Vancouver dismissed

A lawsuit against the city of Vancouver for allegedly violating Mack Worley’s civil rights has been dismissed.

www.columbian.com

The lawsuit was dismissed with prejudice on Oct. 16 at the agreement of both parties. The city had previously filed for a summary judgment. Vancouver Assistant City Attorney Dan Lloyd said the key issue in the case was whether the officers had probable cause to arrest. A Washington Supreme Court case from 1993 ruled that probable cause exists as a matter of law if a jury convicts someone, even if that conviction is overturned.