Can someone point in the settlement about not bringing gun in for registration?  I’ve read the settlement a couple times but can’t find the reference.

#4 is in the right direction but still needs to be easier.  I.e buy firearm from dealer/FFL, fill out permit, get permit after 14 days, dealer/FFL releases firearm, done.  There should be no reason to have a PTA and registration. Ie two trips.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Can someone point in the settlement about not bringing gun in for registration?  I’ve read the settlement a couple times but can’t find the reference.

#4 is in the right direction but still needs to be easier.  I.e buy firearm from dealer/FFL, fill out permit, get permit after 14 days, dealer/FFL releases firearm, done.  There should be no reason to have a PTA and registration. Ie two trips.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

The settlement is different from the recent judges ruling.  The judge has yet to release his opinion.  But ruled that all 4 are in our favor.  The settlement was issued months ago. The recent ruling was a few days ago.

The settlement is different from the recent judges ruling.  The judge has yet to release his opinion.  But ruled that all 4 are in our favor.  The settlement was issued months ago. The recent ruling was a few days ago.

Thanks for the book report.

A link to what you just said about the judge would be appreciated.

Thanks for the book report.

A link to what you just said about the judge would be appreciated.

Will do once its issued.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

Will do once its issued.

So that "they won" statement was premature?  Or just unofficial but still accurate?

It's confusing.  This is one of those times when less is .... well ..... not enough.   

So that "they won" statement was premature?  Or just unofficial but still accurate?

It's confusing.  This is one of those times when less is .... well ..... not enough.   

this
see hifico FB page for (a little) more details...

Thank you Todd and Hifico!

 

Thank you Todd and everyone else

Just saw this on Johnn B as well. This has been a good week for Hawaii gun rights. Things do not always change for the worse.

https://thereload.com/honolulu-immediately-folds-in-face-of-gun-rights-lawsuit/
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.hid.155633/gov.uscourts.hid.155633.14.0.pdf


Props to Alan Beck, especially at a time when we need to be able to protest and practice civil disobedience without worrying about our guns getting taken away.

State is going to appeal?

https://twitter.com/gunpolicy/status/1430895061462446080?s=20

State is going to appeal?

https://twitter.com/gunpolicy/status/1430895061462446080?s=20

Theyre going to ask to change the law, that way the lawyer gets stiffed with the bill.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

State is going to appeal?

https://twitter.com/gunpolicy/status/1430895061462446080?s=20

The State wants a stay/delay on the ruling because they will appeal the court’s decision.  However the appeal is contingent on grounds on the State Legislators to amend the law so that the state can win the appeal.

Bottom line:  The State is changing the law to win the case.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

The State wants a stay/delay on the ruling because they will appeal the court’s decision.  However the appeal is contingent on grounds on the State Legislators to amend the law so that the state can win the appeal.

Bottom line:  The State is changing the law to win the case.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

How would this even work for the lawyer getting paid.   Doesn't seem fair.  Then no case would be lost they can just change the law. 

The State wants a stay/delay on the ruling because they will appeal the court’s decision.  However the appeal is contingent on grounds on the State Legislators to amend the law so that the state can win the appeal.

Bottom line:  The State is changing the law to win the case.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Is this the same as moving the goalpost like it’s often mentioned here?

The State wants a stay/delay on the ruling because they will appeal the court’s decision.  However the appeal is contingent on grounds on the State Legislators to amend the law so that the state can win the appeal.

Bottom line:  The State is changing the law to win the case.

I'm sure Karl Roads will enthusiastically ramrod this through.  After all, he's such an accommodating fellow.   

They did the same with the taser case (robert vs.ballard). Atty got stiffed, very hard to even get half the $, if any at all.

I personally donated.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

Dang if that happens again.  I'll donate too.

Dang if that happens again.  I'll donate too.

You think your donation is only needed in the future IF something happens again?

I guess the attorneys don't deserve your generosity for the work they did before today, huh?

You think your donation is only needed in the future IF something happens again?

I guess the attorneys don't deserve your generosity for the work they did before today, huh?

I mean if they get paid as normal then they get paid and no issues.  If they don't I'll try help them out....you really can turn anything into a negative eh.

I mean if they get paid as normal then they get paid and no issues.  If they don't I'll try help them out....you really can turn anything into a negative eh.

I only point out the lunacy that is almost all of your posts.

If my post appears negative, maybe it's due to the fact you take it personally.  Sometimes the truth hurts.

So, if the attorneys are paid, the clients they represent are on their own to pay them?  No consideration that their clients may have a problem affording those fees?

Man ..... spoken like a true offspring of lawyers.