The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old January 9, 2009, 06:30 PM   #1
Wildalaska
Junior member
 
Join Date: November 25, 2002
Location: In my own little weird world in Anchorage, Alaska
Posts: 14,174
Flood the Court technique

Just a thought...

Ya'll worried about possible Federal gun bans? Just the ticket then: The day the legislation becomes effective, each and every member of this Board walks over to the US District Court in your district and files a simple action for a declaratory judgement contesting the constitutionality of the legislation.

What we would need is someone to draft the complaint...bet there are enough brains here to do so. Also would need some motion practice

You pay your own fees and file pro per....once the big boys (NRA) file their action (s) (USDC in DC), everyone then moves to consolidate. Thus, not only does the Court have to deal with NRA vs Governemt, but 100, nay, 1000, nay, 10,000....what if everyone filed one...how about 50,000 plaintiffs..

The point? Show the Courts whats what.

Thoughts?

WildimstressedAlaska ™
Wildalaska is offline  
Old January 9, 2009, 06:41 PM   #2
crashm1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 21, 2007
Location: Western,WI
Posts: 243
I like it and would hope we could get closer to a couple million. That might make some legislators heads explode.
__________________
Government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is force; like fire, a troublesome servant and a fearful master. Never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action. - George Washington
1911s and V-twin sport bikes make me happy.
crashm1 is offline  
Old January 9, 2009, 06:45 PM   #3
divemedic
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 12, 2006
Posts: 1,313
An interesting idea. I wonder if it would get dismissed for lack of standing.
__________________
Caveat Emperor
divemedic is offline  
Old January 9, 2009, 08:43 PM   #4
Trapp
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 5, 2004
Location: KTN
Posts: 1,221
call me pessimistic, but I just don't see the participation levels necessary to accomplish the end goal. how do you propose increased participation?
__________________
HDR Ban!?
It's a shame all of my guns sank with my boat last week...
Time to catch up.....like mayonnaise
Trapp is offline  
Old January 9, 2009, 08:53 PM   #5
MeekAndMild
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 2, 2001
Posts: 4,988
Ken, I don't remember where but I remember some scuttlebutt floating around that you were a retired lawyer. (Or did you play one on t.v. or did you just talk about knowing one? So many years so many posts!)

If so I'd appreciate you to take a little more time explaining the theory, mechanism and mechanics of this proposition. It sounds vaguely like what they used to do in the 60's to advance civil rights for equal housing, voting and job opportunities, but I'm not sure how it would apply to, say an ugly rifle ban, a ban on shipping ammo via UPS or similar ban.
__________________
In a few years when the dust finally clears and people start counting their change there is a pretty good chance that President Obama may become known as The Great Absquatulator. You heard it first here on TFL.
MeekAndMild is offline  
Old January 9, 2009, 08:54 PM   #6
orionengnr
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 9, 2004
Posts: 4,999
Subscribing.
I'm in, but I'd sure like to see some of the forum's leagle eagles contribute.
orionengnr is offline  
Old January 9, 2009, 09:31 PM   #7
gc70
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 24, 2005
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 2,491
Quote:
The point? Show the Courts whats what.
The Courts are political enough to take notice. And Congress would certainly take notice. It is easy to underestimate the seriousness of people only willing to click a mouse on an internet poll, but quite a different story when a substantial number of people actually shell out money to file cases in the federal courts.

Why move to consolidate? I would imagine that 50,000 new cases would effectively cause the court system to grind to a halt. The courts would be clamoring for consolidation.
gc70 is offline  
Old January 9, 2009, 11:43 PM   #8
Wildalaska
Junior member
 
Join Date: November 25, 2002
Location: In my own little weird world in Anchorage, Alaska
Posts: 14,174
Quote:
I wonder if it would get dismissed for lack of standing.
OK...lets make it more fun...all you California guys file a suit in federal court alleging that under Heller, the California AWB/waiting period whatever violates your rights.

1000

2000

3000 suits??? LOL

WilditcouldgetinterestingAlaska TM
Wildalaska is offline  
Old January 10, 2009, 12:21 AM   #9
jesus5150
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 3, 2009
Location: Bismark
Posts: 332
I'm in.
jesus5150 is offline  
Old January 10, 2009, 12:49 AM   #10
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,318
Ken? I'm gonna side with MeekAndMild here.

Give us an outline, give us something substantial to bite into. Give us your reasons for standing.
__________________
National listings of the Current 2A Cases.
Al Norris is offline  
Old January 10, 2009, 01:08 AM   #11
Wildalaska
Junior member
 
Join Date: November 25, 2002
Location: In my own little weird world in Anchorage, Alaska
Posts: 14,174
Hmmm standing....

Well its clear, is it not, that in the case of California, their AWB violates the rights of those citizens who seek to own a military firearm, yes? Heller redux?

WildimsocoldicantstanditAlaska TM

PS...awful lot of motions to dismiss would be necessary

Just ltigate em to death, like the cities did vs Gun Companies.....Payback is a bee-yatche, neh?

PPS...so and to digress...if there is a recognized 2nd amendment right, wouldnt the way to incorporate be a sec 1983 vs say Mayor Bloomberg and the Brady org?
Wildalaska is offline  
Old January 10, 2009, 02:44 AM   #12
209
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 16, 2006
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 269
I like the concept. But as others stated, it'd take a sharp legal mind to write up the motion. And it'd take a lot of organizing to get people involved.
209 is offline  
Old January 10, 2009, 03:20 AM   #13
stevelyn
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 19, 2004
Location: Fairbanksan in exile to Aleutian Hell
Posts: 2,618
Do you mean something like what the Brady/VPC camp is doing with NPS carry?
__________________
Herman Cain '12

Squished bugs on a windshield is proof the slow/heavy bullet theory works.
stevelyn is offline  
Old January 10, 2009, 08:51 AM   #14
Fremmer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 19, 2005
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 3,482
All it would do would be to tie up the judiciary. It would have little effect on the legislative branch, which is responsible for producing the actual legislation. Regardless, I would expect a judge to issue an order limiting the lawsuits filed each day and consolidating all of the cases if necessary, so it would be more of a pain to clerks and court staff than anything else.

An interesting concept though, and far more creative than I am this morning!
Fremmer is offline  
Old January 11, 2009, 09:40 PM   #15
AZ Med18
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 18, 2008
Location: Arizona
Posts: 337
I would be up for this. DC vs Heller did say commonly used firearms should be protected.
__________________
XD 9mm service Ruger LCP
Colt Python .357 magnum AK-47
Mossberg 500 12 gauge
AZ Med18 is offline  
Old January 11, 2009, 10:22 PM   #16
azredhawk44
Junior member
 
Join Date: September 28, 2005
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 6,465
What's the cost involved in filing a case?

If it's less than the cost of a new Colt Delta Elite (that seems to never get in stock up there in snowy Alaskaland), I'd go along with this.

AZRedhawkkeepwarmupthere!44
azredhawk44 is offline  
Old January 11, 2009, 10:33 PM   #17
Danzig
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 30, 2005
Location: Fort Carson, Colorado
Posts: 896
I am on board if someone draws up the proper paperwork.
__________________
Fide et Fortitudine - My family motto
"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences of attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it" - Thomas Jefferson
Danzig is offline  
Old January 11, 2009, 10:48 PM   #18
johnwilliamson062
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 16, 2008
Posts: 6,817
I am in. Subscribing. Just give me a PDF to print out and fill out. Maybe someone should drop a line to the NRA.
__________________
$0 of an NRA membership goes to legislative action or court battles. Not a dime. Only money contributed to the NRA-ILA or NRA-PVF. You could just donate to the Second Amendment Foundation
First Shotgun Thread First Rifle Thread First Pistol Thread
johnwilliamson062 is offline  
Old January 11, 2009, 10:52 PM   #19
MeekAndMild
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 2, 2001
Posts: 4,988
This sounds like something that might just convince people that the RKBA crowd is a bunch of lunatics. It is like telling people to bake cookies by just putting in some flour and some water and some sugar or maybe salt, after all they look alike, chocolate chips or coffee beans take your pick.

Anybody who's really interested might benefit by enquiring about getting some adult leadership.
__________________
In a few years when the dust finally clears and people start counting their change there is a pretty good chance that President Obama may become known as The Great Absquatulator. You heard it first here on TFL.
MeekAndMild is offline  
Old January 11, 2009, 10:57 PM   #20
johnwilliamson062
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 16, 2008
Posts: 6,817
I am with meek and mild. Lets bank on the NRA coming through for us like they did in '94. '86? '68? Throw in a few more of our best years.

Also everyone apply for a C+R. It puts some number on a verifiable list and you are going to really get your moneys worth.
__________________
$0 of an NRA membership goes to legislative action or court battles. Not a dime. Only money contributed to the NRA-ILA or NRA-PVF. You could just donate to the Second Amendment Foundation
First Shotgun Thread First Rifle Thread First Pistol Thread
johnwilliamson062 is offline  
Old January 12, 2009, 12:07 AM   #21
Shane Tuttle
Staff
 
Join Date: November 28, 2005
Location: Blue Grass, IA
Posts: 8,597
I may be a dingbat here due to being uneducated in the judicial system. But in a simplistic view, I see more harm than good done.

There's other cases on file that wouldn't ever be heard if we stuff the court room with more than they could handle. It would be a gridlock, sure. It may make them take heed to our intentions.

However, what about the other important cases that are brought to the courts? We could do more harm than good by flinging feces at the problem.

Just my thoughts. I don't have a formed opinion on the matter. But I don't see how it would be beneficial in the long run.

Tuttletheremustbeotheravenues8
__________________
If it were up to me, the word "got" would be deleted from the English language.

Posting and YOU: http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/posting
Shane Tuttle is offline  
Old January 12, 2009, 12:24 AM   #22
Wildalaska
Junior member
 
Join Date: November 25, 2002
Location: In my own little weird world in Anchorage, Alaska
Posts: 14,174
Massive litigation can win simply by being....massive.

WildaskthetobaccocompaniesAlaska TM

PS...the NRA is gonna do its gig.....the flood of lawsuits wont affect that...and in fact, will help. See g70s post. Folks will take notice.
Wildalaska is offline  
Old January 12, 2009, 06:00 AM   #23
donkee
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 7, 2004
Location: Mid-Michigan
Posts: 431
I'm on board for this.

Watching for something to work with...........
donkee is offline  
Old January 12, 2009, 08:19 AM   #24
divemedic
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 12, 2006
Posts: 1,313
Quote:
I am with meek and mild. Lets bank on the NRA coming through for us like they did in '94. '86? '68?
or like they did with the Heller case. They were against it before they were for it. Funny how the NRA fought so hard to derail Heller, and then neatly stepped in to try and take credit when it worked.


(I am a life member of the NRA, and I am sometimes convinced that it should be the NHA instead of the NRA, because the 2A is about hunting and not rifles.)
__________________
Caveat Emperor
divemedic is offline  
Old January 12, 2009, 03:35 PM   #25
Mike Irwin
Staff
 
Join Date: April 13, 2000
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 36,074
NRA was hesitant on the Heller case for a number of logical reasons.

However, that changed, and NRA came to support the case.

NRA did not attempt to "take credit" other than credit that was due to them for supporting Heller's efforts.
Mike Irwin is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:09 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.11724 seconds with 7 queries