El_Guapo77
NES Member
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
It's a start...This should be interesting.
I guess I need to make another small donation.It's a start...
I guess I need to make another small donation.
Awesome!
Anyone have a link where I can donate $$$ to?
I got this. Roster unconstitutional, needs to f*** off for good. I no speak attorneyFor those of us who speak the common mans American english, could we get a translation?
It's probably easier to say "These two SKUs differ only by the color of the slide; why is only one accepted?" We've already seen that "The AG has provided no guidance to allow EOPSS-accepted firearms to meet their requirements" is a hard hill to climb.Even if they win against the Rooster what do they do about the AG 'Consumer Safety BS'. I would have thought they would have gone for that first. The Rooster could be challenged as restraint of free trade.
Except Glocks are OK on Rooster but not with AG. Just an example.It's probably easier to say "These two SKUs differ only by the color of the slide; why is only one accepted?" We've already seen that "The AG has provided no guidance to allow EOPSS-accepted firearms to meet their requirements" is a hard hill to climb.
Also, defeating the printed roster defeats the AG at the same time. The inverse is not true.
I agree. But we already fought that case and lost for arbitrary reasons of "because guns."Except Glocks are OK on Rooster but not with AG. Just an example.
I got this. Roster unconstitutional, needs to f*** off for good. I no speak attorney
Yeah I’m still in the dark here, appreciate the effort.I got this. Roster unconstitutional, needs to f*** off for good. I no speak attorney
Possibly. Post-Bruen, I think we have more room to demand quantitative bases, though. E.G, "Define: loaded chamber indicator."I worry that the “gun safety“ fig leaf may provide them enough legal cover. You and I know that the point of the roster is to reduce the supply of guns and make them more expensive. It is simply harassment of the industry and legal gun owners. But it is wrapped in the fig leaf of “it‘s for the children”.
Well, no dumbass would EDC a limited edition fancy firearm and let it get all beat up.......nobody would do that!!Bruen "in common use" is the key
The FPC tried to sue the state to remove the roster. The AG successfully had the caseYeah I’m still in the dark here, appreciate the effort.
Slim? But it'll get B-slapped at some point when the dominos start falling in CA and NY. 1st Circuit will look stupid in comparison and get irrelevantized. At some point, other judges will pull them aside and say, "You aren't here to prove a point, but to follow the ruling. Knock it the F off." As looney as they are, I believe they will eventually capitulate on that concept alone.FPC are one of the few orgs I actually throw extra money at. I wonder what our chances are with the 1st circuit
Even if they win against the Rooster what do they do about the AG 'Consumer Safety BS'. I would have thought they would have gone for that first. The Rooster could be challenged as restraint of free trade.