2aHawaii
General Topics => Legal and Activism => Topic started by: RSN172 on January 30, 2017, 06:20:38 PM
-
Will be announced at 8PM (Eastern) Tuesday. People in the know expect it to be Gorsuch, Pryor or Hardiman. Any one of three would be good, but Hardiman is extremely pro 2a. Dems have threatened a filibuster "no matter who he choses." That is a stupid statement.
-
Will be announced at 8PM (Eastern) Tuesday. People in the know expect it to be Gorsuch, Pryor or Hardiman. Any one of three would be good, but Hardiman is extremely pro 2a. Dems have threatened a filibuster "no matter who he choses." That is a stupid statement.
It's extremely highly unlikely that a temper tantrum will produce anything but stupid. And they're gonna be having a long long long temper tantrum.
-
It's extremely highly unlikely that a temper tantrum will produce anything but stupid. And they're gonna be having a long long long temper tantrum.
https://www.youtube.com/v/bNIshK5zdik?autoplay=1&start=52&end=72&controls=1&version=3
-
Really hope its Hardiman just did a brief readup on him he looks good for 2a.
-
I hope its Hardiman too. I will be watching the news around 2PM HST. I'm retired so I can do things like that. Sit around and watch the news.
-
Neil Gorsuch now expected as the pick.
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2017/01/31/sources-trump-will-select-judge-neil-gorsuch-for-scotus-n2279322
An article from American Thinker has some concerns for Gorsuch:
"On the other hand, there is reason for pause with Judge Gorsuch's record. Judge Gorsuch joined in one opinion, United States v. Rodriguez, 739 F.3d 481 (11th Cir. 2013), which causes us to have some concern about his understanding of the relationship between the government and an armed citizenry. To be fair, Judge Gorsuch did not write the Rodriguez opinion – his colleague, Judge Bobby Baldock, was the author. Nevertheless, Judge Gorsuch joined the opinion. He could have filed a principled dissenting opinion, or even a concurring opinion agreeing only in the judgment. The facts of the case are these. A New Mexico policeman observed Mr. Rodriguez, a convenience store clerk, carrying a concealed handgun. Carrying a concealed loaded handgun is illegal in New Mexico without a permit but legal if one has a license to do so. The officer, upon seeing a Rodriguez's handgun, detained him, then – acting first and asking questions later – forcibly disarmed Rodriguez. After finding out that Rodriguez did not, in fact, have a license to carry and, indeed, was a convicted felon, the officer placed him under arrest."
Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/01/judge_neil_gorsuch_some_cause_for_concern.html#ixzz4XNN6j9s2
-
Yeah it appears Neil Gorsuch is the pick. Disappointed. But I guess its better than anything hillary would pick.
-
And its official Neil Gorsuch is it.
-
Now if that old hag Ginsberg would retire, he can pick Hardiman next.
-
Was exactly going to post what you posted.
Presumed dangerous if carrying.
Neil Gorsuch now expected as the pick.
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2017/01/31/sources-trump-will-select-judge-neil-gorsuch-for-scotus-n2279322
An article from American Thinker has some concerns for Gorsuch:
"On the other hand, there is reason for pause with Judge Gorsuch's record. Judge Gorsuch joined in one opinion, United States v. Rodriguez, 739 F.3d 481 (11th Cir. 2013), which causes us to have some concern about his understanding of the relationship between the government and an armed citizenry. To be fair, Judge Gorsuch did not write the Rodriguez opinion – his colleague, Judge Bobby Baldock, was the author. Nevertheless, Judge Gorsuch joined the opinion. He could have filed a principled dissenting opinion, or even a concurring opinion agreeing only in the judgment. The facts of the case are these. A New Mexico policeman observed Mr. Rodriguez, a convenience store clerk, carrying a concealed handgun. Carrying a concealed loaded handgun is illegal in New Mexico without a permit but legal if one has a license to do so. The officer, upon seeing a Rodriguez's handgun, detained him, then – acting first and asking questions later – forcibly disarmed Rodriguez. After finding out that Rodriguez did not, in fact, have a license to carry and, indeed, was a convicted felon, the officer placed him under arrest."
Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/01/judge_neil_gorsuch_some_cause_for_concern.html#ixzz4XNN6j9s2
-
https://www.nraila.org/articles/20170131/nra-applauds-neil-gorsuchs-nomination-to-the-us-supreme-court
-
Check out Wikipedia. Slathering on the liberal bias immediately...
-
I see nothing wrong with Gorsuch opinion in the Rodriguez case. Rodriguez did not have a concealed carry permit and he was a convicted felon.
-
I see nothing wrong with Gorsuch opinion in the Rodriguez case. Rodriguez did not have a concealed carry permit and he was a convicted felon.
The problem come at this, The police officer did not know he was a felon or a CCW holder BEFORE detaining and disarming him. The evidence came onlt after he was detained and searched for the sole reason of carrying a firearm.
-
However, let's put things in perspective.
Imagine... if Hillary... had nominated to the SCOTUS...
Obama.
-
The problem come at this, The police officer did not know he was a felon or a CCW holder BEFORE detaining and disarming him. The evidence came onlt after he was detained and searched for the sole reason of carrying a firearm.
Yup. The officer "lucked" out in that case.
-
However, let's put things in perspective.
Imagine... if Hillary... had nominated to the SCOTUS...
Obama.
That is eternally true. Things can always be worse, but there are varying degrees in which gun owners across the country will tolerate in terms of what is "ideal" as a SCOTUS Justice.
-
"Gorsuch is a Nazi" in 3......2...... (ok CNN, take it from here...)
-
The problem come at this, The police officer did not know he was a felon or a CCW holder BEFORE detaining and disarming him. The evidence came onlt after he was detained and searched for the sole reason of carrying a firearm.
There are a few facts missing in the posts here:
There was a 911 call from a convenience store customer reporting 2 men handling and showing each other pistols at the counter. They were not pointing them at people, but they were not concealed.
Officers were dispatched to investigate "suspicious activity".
When they arrived, they observed Rodriguez stocking shelves. When he bent to pick up product, the Cops observed a .357 tucked in the rear of his waistband.
They asked him to exit the store with his hands in plain sight, to give them less confined space to talk to him.
Rodriguez walked out ahead of the Cops after becoming defensive. As they walked through the door, one officer reached forward and removed the .357 to secure the weapon and ensure everyone's safety.
The court ruled this was a valid, Constitutional Terry Stop in association with a report of suspicious activity. Rodriguez fit the description of one of the two reported by the 911 caller.
https://casetext.com/case/united-states-v-rodriguez-189?page=1295
-
The problem come at this, The police officer did not know he was a felon or a CCW holder BEFORE detaining and disarming him. The evidence came onlt after he was detained and searched for the sole reason of carrying a firearm.
The article states the officer observed Rodriguez carrying a concealed weapon. Being a felon and having no permit, he may have resisted, that is why he was forcefully disarmed. If I was carrying a concealed weapon legally and a LEO came up to question me, I would put my hands where he can see 'um and let him know I have a CCW permit.
I don't know all the details and don't want to speculate. In any case, Gorsuch opinion in the Rodriguez case does not make him anti 2a. It would have been better for 2a rights with Hardiman, but Gorsuch is not a bad choice for the 2a community.
-
There are a few facts missing in the posts here:
There was a 911 call from a convenience store customer reporting 2 men handling and showing each other pistols at the counter. They were not pointing them at people, but they were not concealed.
Officers were dispatched to investigate "suspicious activity".
When they arrived, they observed Rodriguez stocking shelves. When he bent to pick up product, the Cops observed a .357 tucked in the rear of his waistband.
They asked him to exit the store with his hands in plain sight, to give them less confined space to talk to him.
Rodriguez walked out ahead of the Cops after becoming defensive. As they walked through the door, one officer reached forward and removed the .357 to secure the weapon and ensure everyone's safety.
The court ruled this was a valid, Constitutional Terry Stop in association with a report of suspicious activity. Rodriguez fit the description of one of the two reported by the 911 caller.
https://casetext.com/case/united-states-v-rodriguez-189?page=1295
Mahalo for expanding on this! :shaka:
-
"Gorsuch is a Nazi" in 3......2...... (ok CNN, take it from here...)
Already plenty of slamming by supposedly neutral sources, such as Wikipedia.
-
The article states the officer observed Rodriguez carrying a concealed weapon. Being a felon and having no permit, he may have resisted, that is why he was forcefully disarmed. If I was carrying a concealed weapon legally and a LEO came up to question me, I would put my hands where he can see 'um and let him know I have a CCW permit.
I don't know all the details and don't want to speculate. In any case, Gorsuch opinion in the Rodriguez case does not make him anti 2a. It would have been better for 2a rights with Hardiman, but Gorsuch is not a bad choice for the 2a community.
No no, I don't think any of us are saying he is Anti-2A.
Just that Rodriguez case seemed a bit strange, but it looks like Rodriguez is not entirely free of fault either. At first glance it seemed as if the policeman merely noticed he was carrying, and decided to disarm him forcefully. If you read the whole American Thinker article you get that sense (I am blaming the article basically).
-
No no, I don't think any of us are saying he is Anti-2A.
Just that Rodriguez case seemed a bit strange, but it looks like Rodriguez is not entirely free of fault either. At first glance it seemed as if the policeman merely noticed he was carrying, and decided to disarm him forcefully. If you read the whole American Thinker article you get that sense (I am blaming the article basically).
I bet if there was three camera high def video and audio of the entire sequence that people would still disagree about what happened and if it was "right".
-
I wonder if the Rodriguez judgement and the recent judgement that if your armed you don't have other rights, 4th and 1st, and your a perceived threat, all go hand in hand in the bigger picture
-
Well he might not be a Ted Cruz but the opposition against Gorsuch should warm our hearts a bit. Next up is helping Bader Ginsburg fulfill her wish and ship her out to NZ or Venezuela and appoint a stringent supporter of 2A individual rights. Pack the SCOTUS with conservatives who will defeat all types of infringement by any state.
-
Well he might not be a Ted Cruz but the opposition against Gorsuch should warm our hearts a bit. Next up is helping Bader Ginsburg fulfill her wish and ship her out to NZ or Venezuela and appoint a stringent supporter of 2A individual rights. Pack the SCOTUS with conservatives who will defeat all types of infringement by any state.
spoke to my brother who lives/works in DC and is VERY conservative and follows these things closely
he tells me that gorsuch is the unassailable choice
was confirmed unanimously for his circuit court of appeals seat, and is not likely to be reasonably targeted by the libs
any opposition to him will likely make them look even worse than they already look, so they will eventually have to give in
he said that hardiman is associated with the trump family through one of the daughters and would've been the easiest for the left to go apeshit over
also, he has the least experience at the apellate level, so there is some risk that he may be more moderate than conservative
-
I wonder if the Rodriguez judgement and the recent judgement that if your armed you don't have other rights, 4th and 1st, and your a perceived threat, all go hand in hand in the bigger picture
No.
Read my earlier post. The Cops were more than justified in their questioning to investigate the 911 call.
Rodriguez also had prison tats, meaning he was a felon with a gun. People with misdemeanors don't normally go to prison.