Amendment Legal Project
and collaborating patriotic partners
Your Webmaster Skills
to Fight Gun Violence!!!
National gun violence prevention organization, chaired by Sarah Brady, is
seeking a Litigation Website Administrator to be responsible for establishing
and maintaining a secure on-line litigation document repository and updating
and managing a public website, in conjunction with outside vendors and
The above is part of an
advertisement running in the current issue of The Legal Times, a legal
profession newspaper. I would not
want to help their search by telling you exactly who is running the
advertisement, but I will tell you that they are the same people currently
threatening to sue our friends at http://www.handguncontrolinc.org/.
So what does a help wanted
advertisement placed by an anti-freedom group have to do with
KeepAndBearArms.com? Well, an
educated guess as to the website that this person will be maintaining is www.gunlawsuits.com.
This is the home of the CPHV’s Legal Action Project.
The LAP is helping coordinate the various lawsuits intended to destroy
the firearms manufacturing industry, helping to defend unconstitutional gun
laws, and disseminating lies to the legal community about the meaning of the
Second Amendment to the United States Constitution.
KeepAndBearArms.com is not
willing to let this attempt to abuse the courts in an effort to destroy our
freedoms go unanswered. Pro-freedom
lawyers, in coordination with KeepAndBearArms.com are proud to announce the
launch of the Second Amendment Legal Project.
Soon to be located at http://www.KeepAndBearArms.com/2ALP,
the Project’s web site will feature:
on the history and meaning of the Second Amendment as well as state
Constitutional provisions relating to the right to keep and bear arms;
on current litigation that impacts the right to keep and bear arms;
research tools and articles about the functioning of the legal system; and
directory of pro-gun lawyers.
The site will also include a
section accessible only by lawyers and others with a bona fide professional
interest in firearms litigation. This
section will include:
tools for pro-gun lawyers, including a depository of legal briefs; and
for nationwide legal efforts to restore the Second Amendment.
A key feature of the site
will be the development of litigation strategies to restore rights and seek
damages against those who attempt to destroy rights.
Some of the litigation strategies considered so far include:
rights case against governments with discretionary CCW laws.
There is a good chance that it can be shown that permits are granted
to political contributors, the wealthy elite, etc.
This appears to violate procedural due process. Jim March has been
doing exemplary work exposing such elitist practices in California, and
surely there are others engaging in proactive solutions to similar behavior
elsewhere. It is time to come together effectively and launch an offensive,
and it is time to creatively empower individuals in the various states
affected by such horrendous cronyism to act on their own behalves within the
RICO suit against the same defendants.
If it can be shown that the recipients of the permits are essentially
bribing the officials for permits, it would be possible to show a pattern
racketeering activity and establish a RICO claim.
rights suit against the State of Michigan (probably a few other states too).
The criminal statute prohibiting carrying of concealed weapons in
Michigan was passed after a black doctor used a handgun to defend his family
from a lynch mob that didn’t like his family moving into their
neighborhood. This law makes no
explicit reference to race but in its early implementation, due to the
discretionary granting system, permits were granted freely to whites and
never to blacks. I am convinced
that a racial disparity would be found to still exist today.
In addition to violating the 14th Amendment, this seems to
be a “vestige of slavery” under the 13th Amendment and a
state law that continues a vestige of slavery is unconstitutional.
action defamation suit against the former president of S&W for his
outrageous comments about gun owners. S&W
would also be an appropriate named defendant under the doctrine of
respondiat superior because his statements were made during the course of
his duties at S&W.
against any city that is suing gun manufacturers and/or holding gun buy back
programs. By suing
manufacturers the city admits that getting guns off the street is a
financial gain to it. All we
have to show is a lie by the city in promoting the buy back.
A lie for financial gain is fraud.
The plaintiff would need to be a person who was defrauded.
That would most likely mean someone who turned in a gun at a buy back
for much less than it was worth, without knowing at the time that the city
had lied in promoting the event.
by gun owners’ or gun manufacturers’ groups against Rosie O’Donnell
and other celebrities that demonize guns and gun owners much like the suit
in which cattle ranchers sued Oprah. The fact that Rosie is being sued as we
speak by PETA is most interesting timing. How many other celebrities are
viciously labeling you as a gun owner in ways that demand legal recourse? We
see quite a few, they have money we can put to use for freedom, and they
need to be put in check for their hateful and bigoted speech against We The
/ Gross Negligence against journalists, teachers, doctors, ministers, and
anti-gun propaganda groups for disseminating bad information regarding not
owning guns, using trigger locks, or storing unloaded in a vault with the
knowledge that people will act on it to their detriment.
The plaintiff would have to be someone who was injured after
following such advice. With a combined effort, as we have seen in the
anti-rights groups' collaborations, we can identify potential plaintiffs and
empower them with productive lawsuits that get results.
of contract against mayors, police chiefs, Reno, and other law
enforcement/politicians for statements that indicate that people do not need
to own guns for self defense because that is job of the police.
Courts have repeatedly ruled that in general the police do not have a
duty to protect any individual citizen.
However, the same cases indicate that it is also possible for the
police to assume such a duty. It
may be possible to argue that they assume such a duty by making statements
advising people not to prepare to defend themselves because the police will
protect them. How many people have been hurt by these lies? It is time to
hold Lying Public Officials personally and professionally responsible for
their misstatements of fact. We can, we should, and we shall. A good case of
merit is the California event where the parents kept their guns locked up
because of a "law" telling them they had to, resulting in their
children being killed by a madman with a pitchfork. The case, and many
others of similar horrible natures, are ripe for making our voices heard in
the courtrooms. The time has come.
liability against makers of trigger locks and vaults.
They make dangerous products by rendering a gun unavailable for
self-defense. Trigger locks also create a false sense of security
because guns can often be fired accidentally with the lock installed.
against a manufacturer of a smart gun whose owner died because the gun
didn’t work. Obviously this
hasn’t happened yet but we should be ready, because of a recently passed
law it will happen soon in Maryland. The very first case where it happens
(and it will), we need to pounce on the manufacturer and all public
officials who forced this untested "law" on an unsuspecting
population of trusting citizens.
attacking gun control laws using Supreme Court precedent that states,
"A state cannot impose a license, tax or fee on a constitutionally
protected right." Murdock vs. Pennsylvania 319 US 105 (1942).
See also, Follett vs. Town of McCormick, S.C., 321 U.S. 573 (1944)
The Second Amendment Legal
Project is actively seeking lawyers willing to further develop these ideas into
practical litigation strategies, as well as additional litigation ideas.
We will make every effort to assist people who are potential plaintiffs
in any of the above lawsuits in locating a lawyer who is licensed in their state
to pursue the claim.
Please make contact by
expressing your interest in participating in this project -- as either an
attorney or a concerned citizen -- by emailing me at: PThompson@OsborneCraig.com.
As you can imagine, this project is quite sizable, and we ask for patience as we
develop our strategies based on the amount of assistance we receive from the pro
gun legal community as well as the citizenry at large.
The law is only on our side
to the extent that we use it effectively to make our cases in courtrooms. If we
sit idle while anti-rights people trample our rights, our manufacturers, our
dealers and our brethren, what good can come of such inaction? We choose to be
proactive. The time is at hand. What say you?