• 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.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • 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.

VA-ALERT: VCDL is organizing NOW to fight back - we need YOU to do your part!

Va_Nemo

Member
Joined
May 1, 2016
Messages
653
Location
Lynchburg
For whatever reason the decision was the fences stay up. I am confident you would agree it would be a bad idea, legally and politically, to take them down despite that decision.

Nemo
 

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
5,383
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
For whatever reason the decision was the fences stay up. I am confident you would agree it would be a bad idea, legally and politically, to take them down despite that decision.

Nemo
What decision? The supreme court said there was no decision to review. Are you that dense? Where is the trial court's finding of facts and conclusions of law.? Where is it?
 

Va_Nemo

Member
Joined
May 1, 2016
Messages
653
Location
Lynchburg
The best info available show no paperwork produced from the trial court to get up to the appellates it appears. Why-- I don't know. In any event, for whatever reason the governor declared a state of emergency, ordered fencing up and prohibited firearms/weapons on the capital grounds. The courts did not void that.

Carrying a weapon in or storming and removing the fences would have resulted in arrests and criminal charges. As well as substantial bad press and news reports. It may have come out favorable in the months ahead but that would not matter. The idea that gun owners are bad would have been spread far and wide and set 2A freedoms way way back.

Was the litigation handled properly? I do not know-- I was not involved. Were you?

Were the results favorable? No, but are they finished? I strongly suspect no again.

Were the results of the lobby teams going in to legislators offices before, that day and since helpful, most certainly. Has there been any successes in the political fight, yes. Lack of success, also yes. Is the battle over, no.

I really think you should understand this. I am not sure how to explain it better if you do not. But try to communicate to me what you don't understand and I will try again.

Nemo


 

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
5,383
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Va_Nemo do you think before you type? You post the supreme courts ruling saying there was no record to rule on. Did you hear that???????? No record to rule on.
Then you say the court upheld the Governor's order. The supreme court said there was no order. You see a problem????? The Governor's order as a matter of law was void ab initio.

And quit trying to put words words into my mouth. I never said storm the capitol.
 

Va_Nemo

Member
Joined
May 1, 2016
Messages
653
Location
Lynchburg
As far as the underlying case the trial court did not order the fences/gun free zones to be removed. That let the fences stay up.

So yeah, ok, you should have come on over and started removing the fences. We could have met up and I would hold your cash to post your bail. Sure, you go to jail, get all over the news as someone who ignored the law, tried to storm the fences and is a main factor in needing more gun law. You could be famous in CNN, MSNBC, Wash Post, NYT and all them.

Then you litigate the case, win, get it all vindicated in a year or 2 and be 2 paragraphs on page 15 of section C of the Richmond Times and no where else.

And trust me, you would have gotten arrested had you tried to remove the fences and neatly stack them. Its unlikely but you might have been able to get the bottom one put on the ground. You never would have gotten a second section to begin a stack.

Nemo
 

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
5,383
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Va_Nemo, I enjoy guys like you. I hand them a shovel and they just keep digging. Tell me what specific law the court and the Governor were relying on that gave the Governor the power to ban guns on public property during a state of emergency. I'll await your answer.
 

Va_Nemo

Member
Joined
May 1, 2016
Messages
653
Location
Lynchburg
I don't know. He issued the order, the LEOs under his command executed the order and were in a position to enforce that order by whatever means necessary.

Order valid? I think not. Order within the law? Again, I think not.

Anything Northam (or cops) had to follow to prevent them from enforcing his/their decisions? No.

So what do you do? Seems 2 choices. 1- follow it and litigate, fight on political/election/legislative stage, or 2, engage in some type of active resistance. What do you recommend?

If you believe in removing the fences and such, see my comment (#106) above.

And I enjoy guys like you. You wrap yourself in the idea of law and litigation and rights and remedies. That is good in the long term and generally the way to go. But for the immediate you need to deal with what you right here, right now.

Nemo
 

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
5,383
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
I don't know. He issued the order, the LEOs under his command executed the order and were in a position to enforce that order by whatever means necessary.

Order valid? I think not. Order within the law? Again, I think not.

Anything Northam (or cops) had to follow to prevent them from enforcing his/their decisions? No.

So what do you do? Seems 2 choices. 1- follow it and litigate, fight on political/election/legislative stage, or 2, engage in some type of active resistance. What do you recommend?

If you believe in removing the fences and such, see my comment (#106) above.

And I enjoy guys like you. You wrap yourself in the idea of law and litigation and rights and remedies. That is good in the long term and generally the way to go. But for the immediate you need to deal with what you right here, right now.

Nemo
What part of the supreme court's order do you not understand? There was no order issued by the trial court. There was nothing for the police to comply with. The police cannot enforce an unlawful order of the governor. The Supreme Court of the United States made it clear in Heien v. North Carolina, 135 S. Ct. 530, 540 (2014) (If it is appropriate to presume that citizens know the parameters of the criminal laws, it is surely appropriate to expect the same of law enforcement officers—at least with regard to unambiguous statutes.) The law said the Governor could NOT ban guns during a state of emergency. The Governor's Order was illegal and void. The police could not comply with an unlawful order by the Governor, period. Again, what part of the supreme court's order do you not understand?
 

American Patriot

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2009
Messages
235
Location
, ,
What part of the supreme court's order do you not understand? There was no order issued by the trial court. There was nothing for the police to comply with. The police cannot enforce an unlawful order of the governor. The Supreme Court of the United States made it clear in Heien v. North Carolina, 135 S. Ct. 530, 540 (2014) (If it is appropriate to presume that citizens know the parameters of the criminal laws, it is surely appropriate to expect the same of law enforcement officers—at least with regard to unambiguous statutes.) The law said the Governor could NOT ban guns during a state of emergency. The Governor's Order was illegal and void. The police could not comply with an unlawful order by the Governor, period. Again, what part of the supreme court's order do you not understand?

Are you suggesting that a governor and/or police cannot do something illegal and force it upon the citizens? Be legal or illegal is what the courts are for.
 

Va_Nemo

Member
Joined
May 1, 2016
Messages
653
Location
Lynchburg
I understand everything completely. You apparently do not understand the the heads of the Police involved agreed with and followed Northams instructions.

There was no court decision/order/ruling telling them they could not. At that point the only way to act against the instructions of Northam was to engage in activities at that moment which would result in arrest and incarceration.

Again, a couple years later all who engaged in those activities may have been vindicated. But nothing beneficial to the gun freedome idea would result at the time. And it would draw lots and lots of bad press in the interim.

Nemo
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
8,781
Location
here nc
Nemo, what right do you believe gives you this presumption to ask ~ publicly, then continue to demand a response about my advocacy activities? My activities have been and will continue to be private and personally achieved known only to those close cohorts who have a need to know.

therefore, i will not facilitate nor entertain any further nonsensical commentary about the subject so please cease as your self-fulling my pappy's adage!
 

Ghost1958

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2015
Messages
1,255
Location
Kentucky
I don't know. He issued the order, the LEOs under his command executed the order and were in a position to enforce that order by whatever means necessary.

Order valid? I think not. Order within the law? Again, I think not.

Anything Northam (or cops) had to follow to prevent them from enforcing his/their decisions? No.

So what do you do? Seems 2 choices. 1- follow it and litigate, fight on political/election/legislative stage, or 2, engage in some type of active resistance. What do you recommend?

If you believe in removing the fences and such, see my comment (#106) above.

And I enjoy guys like you. You wrap yourself in the idea of law and litigation and rights and remedies. That is good in the long term and generally the way to go. But for the immediate you need to deal with what you right here, right now.

Nemo
22000 strong and armed vs a few hundred cops. Out numbered 300 to 1 and outgunned.

Move the dang fences and ignore the no gun ban that the law of the land deems null and void.

The cops would have done nothing but "create distance ". Quickly.
 

Va_Nemo

Member
Joined
May 1, 2016
Messages
653
Location
Lynchburg
And yes, we could easily have won the day. But we are not fighting for the day. We are fighting for the end.

Nemo
 

Va_Nemo

Member
Joined
May 1, 2016
Messages
653
Location
Lynchburg
Nemo, what right do you believe gives you this presumption to ask ~ publicly, then continue to demand a response about my advocacy activities? My activities have been and will continue to be private and personally achieved known only to those close cohorts who have a need to know.

therefore, i will not facilitate nor entertain any further nonsensical commentary about the subject so please cease as your self-fulling my pappy's adage!

I need no right other than the recognition of your useless typing trying to make yourself feel important. From all I have seen of you it certainly appears you do nothing more than try to show those of us who try to get things done how inconsequential our actions are.

Doing something and partially or even fully failing is always better than doing nothing. Like the old adage goes-- may go down, but will go down fighting. All the indications I see are you will just go down squawking about how others did not do enough.

One more time-- what did you do to expand gun rights today? Anything?

Nemo
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
8,781
Location
here nc
I need no right other than the recognition of your useless typing trying to make yourself feel important. From all I have seen of you it certainly appears you do nothing more than try to show those of us who try to get things done how inconsequential our actions are.

Doing something and partially or even fully failing is always better than doing nothing. Like the old adage goes-- may go down, but will go down fighting. All the indications I see are you will just go down squawking about how others did not do enough.

One more time-- what did you do to expand gun rights today? Anything?

Nemo
You are absolutely right Nemo except this VCDL Lobby day social event has been going on for how many years?

partially/fully failing at your publicized activity after so many years is in no way better than doing nothing...

squawking about how others did not do enough ~ i guess you are not familiar with process/change engineers [six sigma/lean activities] or quality professionals and their purpose in manufacturing/project management to assure events/projects/etc meet repeatable & established criteria thus assuring "customers/organizational/ad nauseam" needs are met within established ROI guidelines. these folks get payed big $$$ as the save organizational monies, assure contractional obligations are met!

your function in the Lobby activity?

Nemo, what right do you believe gives you this presumption to ask ~ publicly, then continue to demand a response about my advocacy activities? My activities have been and will continue to be private and personally achieved known only to those close cohorts who have a need to know.

therefore, i will not facilitate nor entertain any further nonsensical commentary about the subject so please cease as your self-fulling my pappy's adage!
 
Top