bogie
Member
Subject: GCLA LEGISLATIVE UPDATE: MOSC Decision Part 2
Date: Mar 4, 2004 2:38 PM
LEGISLATIVE UPDATE - 26 February 2004 Part 2
DON'T BELIEVE EVERYTHING YOU HEAR IN THE MEDIA!
I know that this will be a hard request to follow... but PLEASE refrain from kitchen-top analysis of the MOSC ruling. There is STILL a lot at stake here and we ARE NOT out of the woods yet.
PLEASE READ this Alert/Update in its Entirety.
At approximately 12:06 pm, the Missouri Supreme Court [MOSC] published its ruling/opinion on the case against HB349 et al filed by Brooks and company [plaintiffs].
When posting the early UPDATE announcing the MOSC publication, I cautioned everyone that the ruling and its impact are being ANALYZED. It IS being analyzed as you are reading this.
Let me convey to you what we know at this time:
1) Plaintiff's claim that HB349 et al [LTC Law] violates Article 1, Section 23 of
the Missouri State Constitution and was unconstitutional was found deficient. The
MOSC declared that the LTC Law WAS constitutional under Article 1, Section 23.
2) Plaintiff's claim that the LTC Law was "unconstitutionally vague" was
DENIED by the MOSC.
3) Plaintiff's claim that the LTC Law "usurps the will of the people"
was DENIED by the MOSC.
4) Plaintiff's $250,000 BOND money was remanded to Judge Ohmer's court for disposition.
5) Non-funded portions of HB349 MAY SOON stand in effect and the permanent injunction
MAY SOON be lifted... STATEWIDE. We will prefer to keep a lid on parts of what this
means for now [see below]. I know... once again I ask you to trust me.
6) The impact of the Hancock ruling is still being analyzed. As stated in my UPDATE
a few days ago, possible corrections were already prepared and in place. Which mechanism
we may choose to go with to "correct" any Hancock deficiencies will be
determined by the analysis of the legal team... again... be patient and stay tuned.
WHERE WE ARE AT NOW.
Unfortunately, waiting... AGAIN. We are STILL analyzing this ruling.
While the temptation is great and is wholly understandable to kitchen-table analyze
this ruling I URGENTLY CAUTION THAT THIS ACTIVITY STOP.
Let the legal team analyze it. That is what the LTC-Legal Defense Fund is for [see
www.learntocarry.com and contribute today]. We NEED ACCURATE ANALYSIS.
If we float our own kitchen-table theories on what the ruling does or does NOT do...
or WHEN they can do it... we could inadvertently get someone on this list following
our table-top advice and unknowingly getting them in legal trouble.
PLEASE remember that a CRIMINAL defense case will cost you tens of thousands of
dollars.
AGAIN... PATIENCE, PLEASE
For THIRTEEN LLOOONNNNGGG years we have waged this struggle. I know... I have been
deep in the struggle for ALL THIRTEEN of them... continuous without stop. I can
count the number of others who have done likewise and still have a few fingers remaining
on my second hand. [You all know who you are an have MY deepest gratitude.]
So if we can be patient... please be patient too.
SHOULD WE CELEBRATE?
Well... yes... and no.
We CAN celebrate the ruling supporting us on Article 1, Section 23. That is a BIG
victory!
We CAN celebrate the ruling supporting us on the "vagueness" issue.
We CAN celebrate the ruling supporting us on the "will of the people"
contention.
We CANNOT yet celebrate the ruling on Hancock. The ruling may well have left some
of the Hancock issues OPEN and that is what the legal team is ANALYZING. Again...
we need to PLEASE remain patient and let them do their job.
WHAT ABOUT POINT 4 LISTED ABOVE... THE BOND?
Here is another reason we must ALWAYS BE POLITE.
The $250,000 bond will be debated for disposition in JUDGE OHMER's court. Please
refrain from any detracting/disparaging remarks pointed toward the judge or his
court. Believe me, you MAY feel better if you call someone names. BUT I BELIEVE
YOU WOULD ALL FEEL BETTER IF WE GET THE COURT TO GIVE UP THE WHOLE $250,000 BOND
THAT WAS POSTED BY ANTI-GUN-OWNERS.
The $250,000 could NOW be in serious jeopardy of being lost in PART or IN WHOLE.
Lets do what we can to allow the Anti's to LOOSE IT ALL! We can do that by remaining
patient and calm and refraining from emails/postings that could impugn the person
who will be making the determination on how [AND HOW MUCH] of the $250,000 Bond
will be dispositioned.
WHAT CAN I DO NOW?
BE PATIENT... still.....
The law is somewhat vague on WHEN this Opinion becomes effective.. Due to a rule
which says that Post-Opinion-Motions can be filed up to fifteen days after the opinion
is issued, the safer course is to NOT carry in your car or with an Out-Of-State
permit UNTIL that time has elapsed AND until we get further guidance from the legal
team on the impact of any post-opinion motions [if any].
We should NOT speculate on Car Carry or Out-Of-State permits [OOS permits]... PERIOD.
I know that this IS tough. But, again, please be patient, ALWAYS be POLITE, and
hang in there... we WILL overcome.
Greg Jeffery
Legislative Chairman, Gateway Civil Liberties Alliance
www.gclastl.org
Legislative Coordinator, Missourians for Personal Safety
www.moccw.org
Designated Part-time Spokesman, Western Missouri Shooters Alliance
www.wmsa.net
-
Gateway Civil Liberties Alliance
P. O. Box 19739, Brentwood, MO 63144
Phone: 314-385-GUNS (4867) or 1-866-385-GUNS (4867)
Email Address: [email protected]
www.gclastl.org
Date: Mar 4, 2004 2:38 PM
LEGISLATIVE UPDATE - 26 February 2004 Part 2
DON'T BELIEVE EVERYTHING YOU HEAR IN THE MEDIA!
I know that this will be a hard request to follow... but PLEASE refrain from kitchen-top analysis of the MOSC ruling. There is STILL a lot at stake here and we ARE NOT out of the woods yet.
PLEASE READ this Alert/Update in its Entirety.
At approximately 12:06 pm, the Missouri Supreme Court [MOSC] published its ruling/opinion on the case against HB349 et al filed by Brooks and company [plaintiffs].
When posting the early UPDATE announcing the MOSC publication, I cautioned everyone that the ruling and its impact are being ANALYZED. It IS being analyzed as you are reading this.
Let me convey to you what we know at this time:
1) Plaintiff's claim that HB349 et al [LTC Law] violates Article 1, Section 23 of
the Missouri State Constitution and was unconstitutional was found deficient. The
MOSC declared that the LTC Law WAS constitutional under Article 1, Section 23.
2) Plaintiff's claim that the LTC Law was "unconstitutionally vague" was
DENIED by the MOSC.
3) Plaintiff's claim that the LTC Law "usurps the will of the people"
was DENIED by the MOSC.
4) Plaintiff's $250,000 BOND money was remanded to Judge Ohmer's court for disposition.
5) Non-funded portions of HB349 MAY SOON stand in effect and the permanent injunction
MAY SOON be lifted... STATEWIDE. We will prefer to keep a lid on parts of what this
means for now [see below]. I know... once again I ask you to trust me.
6) The impact of the Hancock ruling is still being analyzed. As stated in my UPDATE
a few days ago, possible corrections were already prepared and in place. Which mechanism
we may choose to go with to "correct" any Hancock deficiencies will be
determined by the analysis of the legal team... again... be patient and stay tuned.
WHERE WE ARE AT NOW.
Unfortunately, waiting... AGAIN. We are STILL analyzing this ruling.
While the temptation is great and is wholly understandable to kitchen-table analyze
this ruling I URGENTLY CAUTION THAT THIS ACTIVITY STOP.
Let the legal team analyze it. That is what the LTC-Legal Defense Fund is for [see
www.learntocarry.com and contribute today]. We NEED ACCURATE ANALYSIS.
If we float our own kitchen-table theories on what the ruling does or does NOT do...
or WHEN they can do it... we could inadvertently get someone on this list following
our table-top advice and unknowingly getting them in legal trouble.
PLEASE remember that a CRIMINAL defense case will cost you tens of thousands of
dollars.
AGAIN... PATIENCE, PLEASE
For THIRTEEN LLOOONNNNGGG years we have waged this struggle. I know... I have been
deep in the struggle for ALL THIRTEEN of them... continuous without stop. I can
count the number of others who have done likewise and still have a few fingers remaining
on my second hand. [You all know who you are an have MY deepest gratitude.]
So if we can be patient... please be patient too.
SHOULD WE CELEBRATE?
Well... yes... and no.
We CAN celebrate the ruling supporting us on Article 1, Section 23. That is a BIG
victory!
We CAN celebrate the ruling supporting us on the "vagueness" issue.
We CAN celebrate the ruling supporting us on the "will of the people"
contention.
We CANNOT yet celebrate the ruling on Hancock. The ruling may well have left some
of the Hancock issues OPEN and that is what the legal team is ANALYZING. Again...
we need to PLEASE remain patient and let them do their job.
WHAT ABOUT POINT 4 LISTED ABOVE... THE BOND?
Here is another reason we must ALWAYS BE POLITE.
The $250,000 bond will be debated for disposition in JUDGE OHMER's court. Please
refrain from any detracting/disparaging remarks pointed toward the judge or his
court. Believe me, you MAY feel better if you call someone names. BUT I BELIEVE
YOU WOULD ALL FEEL BETTER IF WE GET THE COURT TO GIVE UP THE WHOLE $250,000 BOND
THAT WAS POSTED BY ANTI-GUN-OWNERS.
The $250,000 could NOW be in serious jeopardy of being lost in PART or IN WHOLE.
Lets do what we can to allow the Anti's to LOOSE IT ALL! We can do that by remaining
patient and calm and refraining from emails/postings that could impugn the person
who will be making the determination on how [AND HOW MUCH] of the $250,000 Bond
will be dispositioned.
WHAT CAN I DO NOW?
BE PATIENT... still.....
The law is somewhat vague on WHEN this Opinion becomes effective.. Due to a rule
which says that Post-Opinion-Motions can be filed up to fifteen days after the opinion
is issued, the safer course is to NOT carry in your car or with an Out-Of-State
permit UNTIL that time has elapsed AND until we get further guidance from the legal
team on the impact of any post-opinion motions [if any].
We should NOT speculate on Car Carry or Out-Of-State permits [OOS permits]... PERIOD.
I know that this IS tough. But, again, please be patient, ALWAYS be POLITE, and
hang in there... we WILL overcome.
Greg Jeffery
Legislative Chairman, Gateway Civil Liberties Alliance
www.gclastl.org
Legislative Coordinator, Missourians for Personal Safety
www.moccw.org
Designated Part-time Spokesman, Western Missouri Shooters Alliance
www.wmsa.net
-
Gateway Civil Liberties Alliance
P. O. Box 19739, Brentwood, MO 63144
Phone: 314-385-GUNS (4867) or 1-866-385-GUNS (4867)
Email Address: [email protected]
www.gclastl.org
