Laugh Out Loud Laugh Out Loud:  0
Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: NRA Must Publicly Name Plaintiffs

  1. #1
    Senior Member RightsEroding's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    2,101
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    455 Post(s)

    NRA Must Publicly Name Plaintiffs

    LINK

    Why not have the NRA as plaintiff with the young people filing a Amicus Brief?

    As a aside; this is why the NRA continues to receive financial backing from me.
    Like them or not; the speed at which this came before the court shows the NRA swings a big stick.
    "A covenant not to defend myself from force, by force, is always void"...Thomas Hobbes

  2. #2
    Curmudgeon OldVet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    Margaritaville
    Posts
    11,272
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    1600 Post(s)
    I don't know anything about Amicus briefs, or Amicus boxers for that matter, but seeing as the plaintiffs are not minors (although treated as such by this new law), why would they expect to be un-named?

    I think Scott signed the bill to appease the Parkland crowd, knowing that it would later be overturned.
    Official Forum Curmudgeon Nonsense, I have not yet begun to defile myself.
    Tact: The skill of telling people to go to hell in such a way that they look forward to the trip.

  3. #3
    Senior Member Siam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    945
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    530 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by RightsEroding View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    LINK

    Why not have the NRA as plaintiff with the young people filing a Amicus Brief?

    As a aside; this is why the NRA continues to receive financial backing from me.
    Like them or not; the speed at which this came before the court shows the NRA swings a big stick.
    And that is why I still give money to the NRA, though sometimes I question them.

  4. #4
    Asst. Administrator ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    8,193
    Mentioned
    31 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    1142 Post(s)
    Right to face one's accusers, publicly. Like anywhere else, in the courts. It's not as though this is a sexual molestation case in which children are at dire risk, if outed. They're making a point and pushing a perspective, and some people in this world are going to vilify them for it ... same as anywhere else in the world. That it happens to be conservative "gun" points doesn't matter.

    Seems to me, that's a principle worth fighting for. I support the judge's ruling on that point.

    Welcome to the real world, kids. It is what it is. Be glad of it. And fight for it.
    Cardinal principle: Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Philosophy: Why the Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos)
    On the RKBA: Most of what you think you know about our Constitution is wrong -- Michael Badnarik

  5. #5
    Senior Member RightsEroding's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    2,101
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    455 Post(s)

    Quote Originally Posted by ccw9mm View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Right to face one's accusers, publicly. Like anywhere else, in the courts. It's not as though this is a sexual molestation case in which children are at dire risk, if outed. They're making a point and pushing a perspective, and some people in this world are going to vilify them for it ... same as anywhere else in the world. That it happens to be conservative "gun" points doesn't matter.

    Seems to me, that's a principle worth fighting for. I support the judge's ruling on that point.

    Welcome to the real world, kids. It is what it is. Be glad of it. And fight for it.
    As I said; why not let the NRA bring suit? They've done so many many times.
    These kids are not paying for the legal leg work anyway.
    "A covenant not to defend myself from force, by force, is always void"...Thomas Hobbes

  6. #6
    Senior Member SOS24's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    2,550
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    270 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by RightsEroding View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    As I said; why not let the NRA bring suit? They've done so many many times.
    These kids are not paying for the legal leg work anyway.
    The suit is suppose to be people who have been "harmed" not just an organization which feels the law is wrong. Therefore, the plaintiffs must be named individuals impacted by the law.
    "Itís the unconquerable soul of man, not the nature of the weapon he uses, that insures victory." Gen George S. Patton

  7. #7
    Senior Member RightsEroding's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    2,101
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    455 Post(s)

    Quote Originally Posted by SOS24 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The suit is suppose to be people who have been "harmed" not just an organization which feels the law is wrong. Therefore, the plaintiffs must be named individuals impacted by the law.
    Untrue.

    ANY law enacted can be challenged by anyone.
    We are not discussing a case of liability or neglect where damages are sought.

    I am not a attorney, but I do know the NRA and other groups have often brought suit against the fed or the state when we are speaking of laws; not liability.

    The case is National Rifle Association v. Bondi, No. 4:18-cv-137 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida.
    Last edited by RightsEroding; May 15th, 2018 at 01:03 PM.
    "A covenant not to defend myself from force, by force, is always void"...Thomas Hobbes

  8. #8
    Asst. Administrator ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    8,193
    Mentioned
    31 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    1142 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by RightsEroding View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    As I said; why not let the NRA bring suit? They've done so many many times.
    These kids are not paying for the legal leg work anyway.
    I've no problems with a lawsuit being brought. Standard protocol ... have legal standing, claim some harm, present accusations and accusers, and provide opportunity of the accused to answer such charges publicly.

    My only issue is with the attached concept of "kids being shielded" in this lawsuit. Seems to me it's a garden-variety claim, and that the BOR's protections of everyone's right to face one's accusers must be upheld. Can't see how it can be suggested any parties to any aspect of a lawsuit should be given preferential status to a) make accusations but b) remain anonymous while doing so (thereby disallowing the accused to directly face and question the accusers). I appreciate this isn't a criminal trial, but still. The principle should still hold.

    Bring the lawsuit and fire away. I'm all for it. I'm just not for special treatment of parties.
    Cardinal principle: Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Philosophy: Why the Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos)
    On the RKBA: Most of what you think you know about our Constitution is wrong -- Michael Badnarik

  9. #9
    Curmudgeon OldVet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    Margaritaville
    Posts
    11,272
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    1600 Post(s)
    I'm fine with the NRA filing a lawsuit "on behalf" of all FL adults 18-20 who have been unjustly and Constitutionally wronged by this new law. Adults of this age certainly do not have the finances to take on this battle. If I were 18-20, I'd gladly add my name to this suit.
    Official Forum Curmudgeon Nonsense, I have not yet begun to defile myself.
    Tact: The skill of telling people to go to hell in such a way that they look forward to the trip.

  10. #10
    Senior Member RightsEroding's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    2,101
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    455 Post(s)

    Quote Originally Posted by ccw9mm View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I've no problems with a lawsuit being brought. Standard protocol ... have legal standing, claim some harm, present accusations and accusers, and provide opportunity of the accused to answer such charges publicly.

    My only issue is with the attached concept of "kids being shielded" in this lawsuit. Seems to me it's a garden-variety claim, and that the BOR's protections of everyone's right to face one's accusers must be upheld. Can't see how it can be suggested any parties to any aspect of a lawsuit should be given preferential status to a) make accusations but b) remain anonymous while doing so (thereby disallowing the accused to directly face and question the accusers). I appreciate this isn't a criminal trial, but still. The principle should still hold.

    Bring the lawsuit and fire away. I'm all for it. I'm just not for special treatment of parties.
    I have no problem with verifying the very existence of litigants.

    Many cases; particularly class action suits are (et al)....Although such are completely identifiable, rarely are they as there are simply too many.

    My original question
    Why not have the NRA as plaintiff with the young people filing a Amicus Brief?
    ..now makes me wonder; is the NRA using these kids as props? If so, this is not a good thing.

    Again, the NRA could easily have brought this challenge w/o 19 yr olds as plaintiffs; so why use the kids?

    If a law is bad, fight it, get it overturned. Just don't place youth at the tip of your political spear, right or wrong.

    I too agree with the judge. Witness protection is employed AFTER one faces their accusers; so let the NRA pay these kids freight if they are really concerned over their safety.
    "A covenant not to defend myself from force, by force, is always void"...Thomas Hobbes

  11. #11
    Senior Member Ghost1958's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    3,185
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    397 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by RightsEroding View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    LINK

    Why not have the NRA as plaintiff with the young people filing a Amicus Brief?

    As a aside; this is why the NRA continues to receive financial backing from me.
    Like them or not; the speed at which this came before the court shows the NRA swings a big stick.
    They lost their Motion. Where is the big stick?
    Odd how most folks who say they support the Constitution as written ,,,,,,,,,,,,really don't.

  12. #12
    Senior Member RightsEroding's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    2,101
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    455 Post(s)

    Quote Originally Posted by Ghost1958 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    They lost their Motion. Where is the big stick?
    Me thinks it was wishful thinking; they didn't shop hard enough for a judge.

    $5 will get you $10 the kids will be dropped as plaintiffs.
    "A covenant not to defend myself from force, by force, is always void"...Thomas Hobbes

  13. #13
    Senior Member SOS24's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    2,550
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    270 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by RightsEroding View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Untrue.

    ANY law enacted can be challenged by anyone.
    We are not discussing a case of liability or neglect where damages are sought.

    I am not a attorney, but I do know the NRA and other groups have often brought suit against the fed or the state when we are speaking of laws; not liability.

    The case is National Rifle Association v. Bondi, No. 4:18-cv-137 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida.
    I am not a lawyer so maybe you are right but I remember even recently with cases against the various Trump policies to include the immigration bans, legal cases could not be brought unless there were specific named parties who were harmed by the policy. Even with states bringing the cases they had to show specific harm was done to the state or to individual citizens of the state.
    "Itís the unconquerable soul of man, not the nature of the weapon he uses, that insures victory." Gen George S. Patton

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •