Young v. Hawaii en banc (Read 16250 times)

punaperson

Re: Young v. Hawaii en banc
« Reply #20 on: September 24, 2020, 07:56:28 AM »
Reminder: The hearing is 10:30 AM this morning. See above for live links to the hearing video. I'm hoping hoping hoping for an excellent presentation from Mr. Beck and a fair response from the panel judges.  :shaka:

punaperson

Re: Young v. Hawaii en banc
« Reply #21 on: September 24, 2020, 11:26:54 AM »
Okay... well, I'm kinda nauseous... anyone else?

Drakiir84

Re: Young v. Hawaii en banc
« Reply #22 on: September 24, 2020, 11:27:44 AM »
Braddah Alan should look into getting his sinuses fixed.
"The rifle is a weapon. Let there be no mistake about that. It is a tool of power, and thus dependent completely upon the moral stature of its user. It is equally useful in securing meat for the table, destroying group enemies on the battlefield, and resisting tyranny. In fact, it is the only means of resisting tyranny, since a citizenry armed with rifles simply cannot be tyrannized."
-Jeff Cooper

rpoL98

Re: Young v. Hawaii en banc
« Reply #23 on: September 24, 2020, 11:34:16 AM »
"HPD" attorney was pretty slick, and condescending.

"equipoise", sheesh.

Flapp_Jackson

Re: Young v. Hawaii en banc
« Reply #24 on: September 24, 2020, 11:37:20 AM »
Okay... well, I'm kinda nauseous... anyone else?

Well......um....I.....um.......I mean......um.......well........um.......if I.......um.......*barf*   :wacko:
The reasonable man adapts himself to the world;
the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself.
Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man.
-- George Bernard Shaw

zippz

Re: Young v. Hawaii en banc
« Reply #25 on: September 24, 2020, 12:05:01 PM »
The opposing side is a million dollar top notch attorney team.  Hawaii went for the best.  Good at presenting their case and making up BS

Judges had their minds made up before the hearing.  The hearing can only sway them a little or change the focus in minor ways.

Alan is a good man and has a good heart, he took the case for Mr Young when no one else did and when hardly anyone knew about it.  I can relate with him as I my public speaking skills are bad.  We're always analyzing so we can't focus on speaking.

rpoL98

Re: Young v. Hawaii en banc
« Reply #26 on: September 24, 2020, 12:13:41 PM »
Braddah Alan should look into getting his sinuses fixed.
Braddah Alan should make more of an investment into live-stream audio equipment.  I mean, come on, man, Twitch live-streamers spend more on mic's and cam's than what we saw today.  Same applies to some of the judges, who apparently don't take this work-from-home situation seriously.

Gee whiz, there's a fuck-ton of rights at stake here, bring the A-game.  yeah, i know, costs money, limited resources, Wayne LaPierre's thousand-dollar suits and all.

ETA:  what i mean, is, our 2A money would be better spent helping Braddah Alan out, rather than clothing Wayne LaPierre.

zippz

Re: Young v. Hawaii en banc
« Reply #27 on: September 24, 2020, 12:21:15 PM »
About 5 organizations helped Alan prepare for this hearing, including the NRA.

Charles Nichols

Re: Young v. Hawaii en banc
« Reply #28 on: September 24, 2020, 01:00:12 PM »
Okay... well, I'm kinda nauseous... anyone else?

Alan Beck did an impressive job of arguing his case.  The panel he drew was not his fault.  If he loses then it is the fault of the judges, not because of his oral argument.

Neither Beck nor I is an orator like Richard Burton.  What is important in an oral argument is what one says, and just importantly, what one does not say.  Beck said what he needed to say and didn't say anything the panel ccould take as a concession.  That doesn't mean that the panel won't put words in his mouth or rewrite the facts of his case in favor of the state but that, once again, that is not his fault.

Charles Nichols

Re: Young v. Hawaii en banc
« Reply #29 on: September 24, 2020, 01:02:14 PM »
About 5 organizations helped Alan prepare for this hearing, including the NRA.

What five organizations would that be?  How do you know that they helped him prepare for his hearing?  It certainly wasn't the NRA helping him to prepare.  Chuck "strap on" Michel criticized back within the last week or so.

Brystont1

Re: Young v. Hawaii en banc
« Reply #30 on: September 24, 2020, 01:26:27 PM »
To think that the state uses our own hard working tax dollars to hire lawyers like that to deny us our rights just sickens me to no end.

dwela

Re: Young v. Hawaii en banc
« Reply #31 on: September 24, 2020, 01:59:42 PM »
The state’s attorney crowing about how Hawaii had kept citizens from open carrying for a hundred and sixty eight years.  That a-hole was proud of that.

zippz

Re: Young v. Hawaii en banc
« Reply #32 on: September 24, 2020, 02:21:29 PM »
What five organizations would that be?  How do you know that they helped him prepare for his hearing?  It certainly wasn't the NRA helping him to prepare.  Chuck "strap on" Michel criticized back within the last week or so.

NRA did it not of want, but of need.  Other was heritage or federalist society.  Forgot what the others were.  It was a big group effort behind the scenes.

Charles Nichols

Re: Young v. Hawaii en banc
« Reply #33 on: September 24, 2020, 03:01:51 PM »
NRA did it not of want, but of need.  Other was heritage or federalist society.  Forgot what the others were.  It was a big group effort behind the scenes.

Where did you hear of this?  Neither Beck nor his partner made any mention of it to me.  Granted I hear more often from his partner than from Beck but it seems to me his partner would have been kept in the loop.

In any event, I think Beck did very well.  And if you knew how critical I had been of him in the past then that might just count for something.

Charles Nichols

Re: Young v. Hawaii en banc
« Reply #34 on: September 24, 2020, 03:33:24 PM »
NRA did it not of want, but of need.  Other was heritage or federalist society.  Forgot what the others were.  It was a big group effort behind the scenes.

Four hours ago, the NRA lawyer, Chuck "strap on" Michel took a dump on Alan Beck for arguing the Young case out of "ego and pride."  Either you are misinformed about the NRA coaching Mr. Beck or Michel has been cut out of the loop.

pj_benn

Re: Young v. Hawaii en banc
« Reply #35 on: September 25, 2020, 11:34:32 AM »
Is there a time limit for the decision?

Charles Nichols

Re: Young v. Hawaii en banc
« Reply #36 on: September 25, 2020, 01:18:21 PM »
Is there a time limit for the decision?

No time limit.

hvybarrels

I’m becoming clinically undepressed and thinking about beginning it all.

RSN172

Re: Young v. Hawaii en banc
« Reply #38 on: September 25, 2020, 03:13:02 PM »
No time limit.
Ha, I can see them taking 2 or more years.  Congress needs to make a law requiring decisions to be made in 6 months or less.That should be more than adequate.
Happily living in Puna

Charles Nichols

Re: Young v. Hawaii en banc
« Reply #39 on: September 25, 2020, 03:21:55 PM »
Ha, I can see them taking 2 or more years.  Congress needs to make a law requiring decisions to be made in 6 months or less.That should be more than adequate.

They won't take 2 or more years.  If they take a year, Beck can file a writ of mandamus with SCOTUS asking that the 9th circuit issue its opinion.  I would have to recheck the law but I am pretty sure he can file a cert petition with SCOTUS before the 9th circuit issues its opinion.  There is an informal rule that these petitions take five votes to grant but if SCOTUS nominates the right person and she is confirmed then Beck may very well have the fifth vote he needs to grant his petition, and the five votes he needs to win.