View Single Post
Old September 30, 2011, 08:54 AM   #221
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,318
Originally posted August 11, 2011 by Al Norris:

As Some have noticed, someone at SCOTUS has requested a response from the Feds in Masciandaro. More about that in this thread.

In Peterson v. Kilroy, et al (was Garcia, was LaCabe), on Sunday Aug. 7th, a reply was due (Aug. 8th), by Gray Peterson and was filed.

As you may (or not) recall, the State filed its reply and argued about its Concealed Carry laws. The City/County of Denver refused to respond, leaving any defense to the State.

In this reply, Gray points out that the matter before the court is not a matter of the type of carry. It is a matter that Denver requires a State CWP in order to carry at all (openly or concealed). In as much as the City/County of Denver refuses to recognize all out of state CWP's, then the City/County is restricting such persons from exercising their fundamental right to self protection.

The attached reply brief is a good read and is entirely amusing. It is also written so that anyone can understand the issues of the case. Enjoy.
Attached Files
File Type: pdf Peterson 10C Appellant Reply Brief 2011_08_07.pdf (216.9 KB, 1 views)
Al Norris is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.04202 seconds with 8 queries