quote:

Originally posted by HRK:

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:

quote:

Originally posted by jhe888:


(The tort claims act speaks specifically about personal injury, bodily injury, wrongful death or property damage. Taking away someone's gun does not fit the definition of the claims covered.)

Oh I don't know. I could certainly forsee a case to be made for any of those as a result of a person's right to defend him or herself being denied.

Perhaps if you were a licensed concealed carry individual, and during this 30 day period were accosted/robbed/mugged/beaten/property stolen you could have a case back against the NM Government for enacting this period and as such you were unable to carry and thus protect yourself/property...

Maybe. 28 USC 1983 may (or may not) give rise to a claim for injury caused by a deprivation of civil rights. Maybe there is some other basis of liability. This is a convoluted area with a lot of exceptions and immunities, and it isn't smart to hold opinions about it without a lot of knowledge. Of course, this is the internet, where, as JAllen used to say, knowing what you are talking about is generally admired, but isn't strictly required.

(My original point is that the tort claims act is likely about direct injuries, not indirect ones.)

quote:

Originally posted by jhe888:


(The tort claims act speaks specifically about personal injury, bodily injury, wrongful death or property damage. Taking away someone's gun does not fit the definition of the claims covered.)

As I read the law as quoted earlier, it also includes "or any other deprivation of any rights, privileges or immunities secured by the constitution and laws of the United States or New Mexico when caused by law enforcement officers". That is, those acts are not protected under immunity.

Has the shooter of this 11yr old that spur'd this action by the governor been apprehended and arrested?

https://www.thegatewaypundit.c...-grisham-offers-free

Fenix ammo offers free shipping to anyone in NM with awesome discount code.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mU82W84Tgi0

Great press conference today by the Bernalillo County Sheriff.

If you want to see where this stupid leftist bitch’s allegiances lie, announce a county wide crack down with heavy police presence in high crime areas. Full court press on gangs, set a curfew for teens, aggressively prosecute anyone involved in violence against law abiding citizens, etc. When she speaks out against the usual cries of discrimination because the right people are being targeted, she’ll give herself away.

Here is a different take on the situation. I think he may be giving too much credit to the left. The part about shifting the Overton window seems accurate.

So this kook drew the short straw among Newsome and pritzker and other commie gov’s ? They have been eerily silent. Styxhammer is correct. She’s setting herself up to work at a big anti gun foundation.

This does need to be stopped legally asap so the precedent of suspension of rights for some bs emergency in the future can be pointed back to this case and not even get started. That is where they may have over played their hand on this one. Unless she totally went rogue and lieu and Hogg and the DNC all know this is no good for their future emergency powers and that’s why they all came out against it.

So hypothetically since apparently the local cops have denounced, what happens if say a state officer is harmed while trying to effect an arrest of this blatant illegal order. Does a person not have a right to defend themselves Vs an unlawful arrest ?

quote:

Originally posted by HKAngusKL:
Here is a different take on the situation. I think he may be giving too much credit to the left.

wouldn't put it past them

The tyrants were emboldened during/by the pandemic. The were drunk with power, gleefully rubbing our noses in the dirt with their sense of invincibility.

This tyrant in NM misread the citizenry. She went too far without a sufficiently frightening excuse.

The more astute leftists recognized it and are distancing from her to protect their own careers. They would all do the same as her or more if they thought they could get away with it. Their opposition is temporary and fake.

A TRO application was filed and the case assigned to a judge who I believe was an Obama appointment.

The court calendar showed that the TRO hearing was set for today however, the last docket entry shows it was vacated and the TRO hearing will be set for a future date.

I don't think this was meant to run out the 30 day clock as much it was to set it for a day when the Governor's legal staff will respond. The TRO application was an ex parte request for the order and the judge wants both sides present.

I've said this before and I'll say it again. This country is in serious trouble if judges make their decisions based on the doctrine of the political party they are affiliated with as opposed to a blind and balanced interpretation of the law.

SAF SUES NM GOV. LUJAN GRISHAM

OVER EMERGENCY CARRY BAN



BELLEVUE, WA – The Second Amendment Foundation has filed a federal lawsuit against New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham and four other officials on the grounds that the governor’s “emergency order’ prohibiting open and concealed carry in Albuquerque and surrounding Bernalillo violates the Second and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution.



Joining SAF are the New Mexico Shooting Sports Association, Firearms Policy Coalition and a private citizen, Zachary Fort, who resides in Bernalillo County. They are represented by Jordon George of Aragon Moss George Jenkins, LLP who has also filed a motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction. The lawsuit and motion were filed in U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico.



In addition to Gov. Lujan Grisham, defendants are Patrick M. Allen, cabinet secretary for the New Mexico Department of Health; Jason R. Bowie, cabinet secretary for the New Mexico Department of Public Safety, and W. Troy Weisler, chief of the New Mexico State Police. They are all sued individually and in their official capacities.



“Despite her clams to the contrary,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb, “Gov. Grisham does not have the authority to ‘suspend’ the Second Amendment for an alleged public health emergency or any other reason. Neither do any of the other defendants, nor can they legally enforce such a suspension.”



“Evidently,” added SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut, “Gov. Lujan Grisham believes she can disregard the constitution to further her own political views. We’re taking action to stop this unconstitutional exercise of power in its tracks, because it is a flagrant violation of the right of individual citizens to carry firearms in public for personal defense.



“Our motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction will prevent the state from further causing injury to the plaintiffs and other citizens under this unlawful order,” Kraut added.

https://www.saf.org/

FPC filed suit as well:
Fort v. Grisham: 2A Challenge to New Mexico Governor's Carry Ban

quote:

Summary: Federal lawsuit challenging the New Mexico Governor's total carry ban.

Plaintiffs: Zachary Fort, Firearms Policy Coalition, Second Amendment Foundation, and New Mexico Shooting Sports Association.

Defendants: New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham, New Mexico Department of Health Cabinet Secretary Patrick Allen, New Mexico Department of Safety Cabinet Secretary Jason Bowie, New Mexico State Police Chief W. Troy Weisler.

Litigation Counsel: Jordon George

Docket: D. NM case no. 1:23-cv-00778

Either she's really out there on the fringe, or, she's accepted the edict from the powers that run the left to push this agenda to see how far states rights can go vs firearm rights. Still think this is a test of the system to see what the courts will determine of a states right to suspend rights during emergencies.



After tasting COVID-19 emergency powers, governors will take aim at more rights

Opinion by Timothy P. Carney

To justify her claim to dictatorial power, Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham (D-NM) says that the Bill of Rights does not apply in emergency situations.



Lujan Grisham announced last week she was unilaterally, universally, and without any process suspending the right to keep and bear arms.

“Isn’t it unconstitutional to say you cannot exercise your carry license?” one reporter asked.

Lujan Grisham responded: “With one exception: And that is, if there’s an emergency — and I’ve declared an emergency for a temporary amount of time — I can invoke additional powers. No constitutional right, in my view, including my oath, is intended to be absolute. There are restrictions on free speech. There are restrictions on my freedoms. In this emergency, this 11-year-old, and all these parents who have lost all these children, they deserve my attention to have the debate about whether or not in an emergency, we can create a safer environment.”
Where does this idea come from, that a governor can unilaterally suspend basic civil rights for an emergency in order to “create a safer environment”?

This is what most executives in the world, including most governors in the United States, did in 2020 to “flatten the curve” or “slow the spread” of COVID-19.

In the Democrat-run county where I lived in 2020, the county government banned even outdoor church services, which was clearly a suspension of the freedom of assembly and the free exercise of religion.

These days, liberals will insist there is a fundamental right to travel across state lines and that state governments have no right to ask for what purposes you’re doing it. But in the spring of 2020, plenty of governors suspended that right without much resistance.

So why should COVID-19 be the only emergency that allows governors to suspend basic civil rights?

Lujan Grisham believes gun violence rises to the level of an emergency that allows her to suspend the Second Amendment (and if you take her literally, to suspend her duty to uphold the Constitution).

If she gets away with this, what other emergencies will rise to that level?

Climate change is an obvious one. President Joe Biden is being told to declare a “climate emergency.” You can imagine plenty of basic rights that a governor might suspend (including that supposed right to travel) in the wake of a climate emergency.

Then there’s the whole Democratic self-image, as the Left believes it is saving democracy itself. Or the notion that disinformation (which means opinions or facts Democrats do not like) is “harmful” to vulnerable populations. Obviously, free speech could be suspended for that reason, according to Lujan Grisham’s logic.

COVID-19 was terrible for a thousand reasons, one of which was that it gave mayors and governors a taste of dictatorial power. Now we’re seeing how far they will take it.


Link

Well, all this certainly takes the conversation and attention off her, and the federal governments, failed policies related to crime, gangs, drugs, open borders and illegal immigration. Has she had a press conference updating the status of the search for, identification of, arrest of, the road rage shooter?

The public health emergency is ignorant politicians and bureaucrats like her.

I AM THE DANGER...

[QUOTE]Originally posted by HRK:

/QUOTE]

When the government learns it can control you by declaring an emergency, it will create emergencies to control you even more

It's a typical knee-jerk, emotion-based reaction from a typically irrational leftist who is using a tragedy to try to advance an agenda.

First of all, there is no such thing as "gun violence". There is only "violence". If the shooter had instead rammed the vehicle and killed the child in this manner, would she be banning driving, and crying about "automobile violence"?

If she wants to ban something, she should start with the illiterate peasant trash that she's allowing to stream across our southern border.

And another thing, guys- if you want to hold up what that grandstanding little bastard David Hogg says as validation for your point of view on this matter, you will also have to accept shit like this, too.

He doesn't know what he's talking about, and that includes when he agrees with you. He's a shitting, squawking parrot. This should be pointed out every time he opens his ignorant, self-serving mouth.