Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

GOA wins battle in San Francisco courts!

Discussion in 'Legal' started by coma, Jun 13, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. coma

    coma Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2004
    Messages:
    71
    Location:
    greenfield mass-o-chussetts
    Here is a copy of the GOA email i just got. Looks like some good news out of Komi-forna.
     
  2. freedom and guns

    freedom and guns member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2006
    Messages:
    126
    Location:
    in a former US state
    THANK YOU JESUS!!!!
     
  3. freedom and guns

    freedom and guns member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2006
    Messages:
    126
    Location:
    in a former US state
  4. freedom and guns

    freedom and guns member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2006
    Messages:
    126
    Location:
    in a former US state
    When I

    read the beginning of the thread and the acompanying article I shouted, jumped up, told my dad, slapped his hands, and got down on my knees and thanked God and asked him to save the judge. I was happy. VICTORY
     
  5. cavman

    cavman Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2005
    Messages:
    1,002
    Location:
    Maine
    What is the relationship between NRA and GOA?

    The GOA takes some credit for significant contribution. NRA makes no mention of the GOA. Are they on good working terms?
     
  6. Bartholomew Roberts

    Bartholomew Roberts Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    14,613
    Location:
    Texas
    In this case the NRA filed the suit and bore the costs of the suit challenging the city's ban. They were likely in a better position to obtain standing since they are a large organization representing lots of people. they were probably also in a better position to bear the costs of the suit which would be greater than filing an amicus brief.

    GOA filed an amicus brief (basically additional legal research from a third party that supports one side in the suit) by the legislator who proposed the state preemption rule that prohibited the SF law. This is unquestionably a valuable and important clarification that had some weight with the court. However, given that SF has already had gun bans shot down twice under this law and that the third attempt isn't much different from the previous unsuccessful attempt, chances were good this law would have been overturned regardless. However, better safe than sorry and it is important that GOA stepped up, got the original legislator and made sure that the best case that could be made was made.
     
  7. sfhogman

    sfhogman Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2004
    Messages:
    559
    Location:
    San Francisco Ca
    The Cityand County is going to appeal Judge Warren's decision.
    The beat goes on.

    Jeff
     
  8. beerslurpy

    beerslurpy member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    4,438
    Location:
    Spring Hill, Florida
    This was not a victory. This is a completely settled area of law and the suit could have been won by anyone that cared to put out the effort. SF had no chance at all to keep the ban.
     
  9. Standing Wolf

    Standing Wolf Member in memoriam

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    24,041
    Location:
    Idahohoho, the jolliest state
    Which may explain why San Francisco has already filed an appeal.
     
  10. Joey2

    Joey2 member

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2004
    Messages:
    306
    Location:
    Hawaii
    Gee, are you sure it was the GOA and not the NRA? The GOA does not comprimise, the NRA DOES.
     
  11. Don't Tread On Me

    Don't Tread On Me Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2004
    Messages:
    2,213
    Location:
    FLORIDA
    Beerslurpy, I have to disagree. While I understand your argument, it isn't how things work. If the people of SF voted for a gun ban, and they got it (which they did)..it WILL be enforced unless someone stands up and fights against it.


    If no one fights it, no matter how wrong it is, no matter what other laws it violated (California state law, California Constitution, U.S. Constitution etc..), it will become the law of that land and be enforced.


    So it is a victory when you beat it down. A majority of social-communist-leftist-liberals cannot prevent a minority of freedom loving Americans their protections under the Bill of Rights. If that were the case, then a simple majority of Americans could vote for just about anything, like slavery and make it legal regardless of what the constitution says.


    Folks, this is just a great reminder that democracy is the devil. There is nothing worse than direct democracy. People are so dumb, they will enslave themselves in no time.
     
  12. bigun15

    bigun15 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2005
    Messages:
    491
    Location:
    California
    That might be one of the most accurate things I have ever heard.
     
  13. Creeping Incrementalism

    Creeping Incrementalism Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2005
    Messages:
    984
    Location:
    S.F. Bay Area
    Cal State Sen. H.L. Richardson wrote the law, and founded GOC and GOA, to help put things in context.
     
  14. bg

    bg Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2003
    Messages:
    903
    Location:
    When you find out, let me know..
    Appeal means more of SF's money down the drain instead of
    taking care of it's citizens. What do the city fathers care though ?
    They'll still be getting THEIR paychecks and allotments each month.
     
  15. SteveS

    SteveS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2003
    Messages:
    866
    Location:
    MI
    SAF, on their website is claiming victory in this suit. They do mention working with the NRA in their press release. I don't see any mention of the SAF in the NRA press release. So is the SAF trying to take credit for something they had little to do with? Why did the NRA not give some credit to the SAF? If it is the latter, then I am diappointed that they wouldn't be willing to share some of the credit.
     
  16. Bartholomew Roberts

    Bartholomew Roberts Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    14,613
    Location:
    Texas
    The lawsuit was filed by NRA, SAF, LEAA and individual plaintiffs affected in San Francisco. NRA and SAF also teamed up for the Katrina/New Orleans lawsuits. I agree that the polite thing to do would be to acknowledge contributions from all groups.
     
  17. xcheck

    xcheck Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2005
    Messages:
    38
    No matter how minor the contribution might have been. :rolleyes:
     
  18. JohnBT

    JohnBT Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    13,233
    Location:
    Richmond, Virginia
  19. the pistolero

    the pistolero Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2006
    Messages:
    783
    Location:
    Beaumont-Port Arthur, Texas
    Would you rather the SAF, GOA, JPFO, etc. all sat on their duffs on the sidelines and let the NRA do all the work all the time? :confused: Yes, all the other organizations aren't as big as the NRA, and maybe the NRA could have taken care of it themselves (anyone who doesn't think so, please feel free to jump in here), but that doesn't make the other organizations' contributions any less welcome or noteworthy. We've regained ground in the last few years, no doubt about it, but that doesn't mean we should feel free to disregard all the other gun-rights-advocacy organizations besides the NRA just because they're not as big or as influential as the NRA. We do that at our peril. No matter how you feel about where we stand today, the fact is that our side is under attack and has been for the last ~40 years. As Benjamin Franklin said, "We must all hang together, or most assuredly we shall all hang separately."
     
  20. JohnBT

    JohnBT Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    13,233
    Location:
    Richmond, Virginia
    "Would you rather the SAF, GOA, JPFO, etc. all sat on their duffs on the sidelines..."

    Of course not. I am still bothered by the claim of "GOA wins battle..."

    John
     
  21. yucaipa

    yucaipa Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2004
    Messages:
    176
    GOA filed an amicus brief and that is good, AB's are a way to support one side and to give judges an idea of what people are thinking, they are also great reference material (as in this one) citing precedent and case law.


    GOA really pushed the envelope in their email with,


    If GOA wants to be a gadfly on this one OK, if they want to use this for a fund raising opportunity OK.

    Because they are a RKBA organization, the rest of the family lets it pass, I just wish GOA could do their fund raising without bad mouthing other people in the RKBA movement and saying things that turn out not to be true.
     
  22. Socrates

    Socrates Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2006
    Messages:
    262
    In this case, you shouldn't be thanking anyone more then Judge Warren.
    He is an upstanding, incredible member of the bench, who I have had the honor of being in both his chambers, and court room.

    If the case had gone before another judge, it well might be the NRA/GOA appealing. I've scene a couple judges that make up law as they go along in Contra Costa County, and this is the true danger to our society.

    S
     
  23. Malum Prohibitum

    Malum Prohibitum Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2006
    Messages:
    572
    The lawsuit was filed by NRA, SAF, LEAA and individual plaintiffs affected in San Francisco. NRA and SAF also teamed up for the Katrina/New Orleans lawsuits. I agree that the polite thing to do would be to acknowledge contributions from all groups.

    The NRA never acknowledges the SAF.
     
  24. Monkeyleg

    Monkeyleg Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    5,058
    Location:
    Decatur, AL
    The more I look at GOA, the more they remind me of Wisconsin Gun Owners (do a search on WGO here on this forum).
     
  25. ilbob

    ilbob Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2006
    Messages:
    12,492
    Location:
    Illinois
    They see every other gun owner group as competition. Not too surprising since that is in effect what it is.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page