Quote:
Originally Posted by GunLawyer001
What does "regulate" mean? Can you issue "regulations" regarding guests in your home, or are those terms and conditions something else?
It wasn't a foregone conclusion what would happen to the PSP "record of sale database", when the law is: "Notwithstanding any section of this chapter to the contrary, nothing in this chapter shall be construed to allow any government or law enforcement agency or any agent thereof to create, maintain or operate any registry of firearm ownership within this Commonwealth." The court found wiggle room in the word "registry". Good, solid lawyers expected otherwise.
You doubt that they can distinguish laws and ordinances of general applicability, from park policies with limited effect and no criminal sanctions?
The law isn't for the weak. There's complication in the simplest sentences and words.
|
A park isn't a home, you're in the vast minority of attorneys and quite frankly I find your stance appalling as a member of the judicial process. You're entitled to your opinion, which to this point has done nothing more than delay justice and made me second guess myself needlessly. However, it has done some good as I now am certain that I'm on solid ground. While I'm thankful for several of your views on this forum, for this delay I'm upset. I place the blame for the delay squarly on myself as I and only I control my reactions.
You now seem to sing a different tune once the rubber meets the road. Either way I now have committed myself to this fight. So I ask you this... Which side are you truly on? Are you with the cause or against it? Say you now so as to clarify your stance for the board.. Are you with us or against us? I have a lawyer not only in mind but financially but would you take up this case? Or is it that you would just prefer we all stay out of the parks? I give you a chance to clarify your position as a matter of respect.