Unlikely pair could usher gun rights case to U.S. Supreme Court

Homesteading & Country Living Forum

Help Support Homesteading & Country Living Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

SHOOTER13

SNIPER
Neighbor
Joined
Nov 26, 2017
Messages
8,649
Location
PENNSYLVANIA
Unlikely pair could usher gun rights case to U.S. Supreme Court

By Daniel Trotta
3 hrs ago


George Young is a Vietnam War veteran who sued the state of Hawaii three times on his own without a lawyer for the right to carry a handgun, and lost each time.

Alan Beck is an independent lawyer who took on Young's appeal for free.

Last month, the duo won a major victory for gun rights when an appeals court found Hawaii's restrictive handgun law unconstitutional, a ruling that could lead to a landmark decision from the U.S. Supreme
Court on the right to bear arms in public. And they did so without the help of the powerful National Rifle Association (NRA) gun lobby.

"I went around the state of Hawaii and contacted about 17 attorneys and all of them turned me down. They said I would only lose," said Young, 68. "I want to see it through to the end, which is the U.S. Supreme Court."

U.S gun-control advocates favor strict laws like Hawaii's, blaming lax gun laws for excessive gun violence and deadly mass shootings in the United States. The NRA and other gun-rights advocates oppose laws that restrict the constitutional right to bear arms and want the high court to take up a new case, hoping it will expand gun rights outside the home.

The Supreme Court has not taken on a major gun-rights case since a pair of cases in 2008 and 2010 in which the court established that the U.S. Constitution's Second Amendment protects an individual's right to keep a gun at home.

Hawaii allows only people who work in security or who can demonstrate to law enforcement officials that they have an "exceptional case" to carry weapons, concealed or openly.

After he left the Army, Young carried a firearm for 17 years as an airport security guard but lost that right after he retired. He failed to convince the County of Hawaii's police chief he deserved a permit, so he sued, saying his constitutional right to bear arms was violated.

He filed suits in 2008, 2010 and 2012 to challenge the denials, losing each time.

Lacking the means to hire a lawyer for an appeal, Young would normally have had to depend on a star litigator financed by the NRA or a major law firm to take the case pro bono, or free of cost.

Instead Young paired up with Beck, a solo practitioner who learned of Young's story and offered to represent him for free.

Beck said he has limited means of his own and that his father has offered to lend him money if needed to keep the case going.

"This covers my pro bono hours for my career. It's worth it. Sometimes you have to do the right thing," Beck said.

Based in California but with family ties in Hawaii, Beck said he took Young's case because he disagreed with the ruling by the U.S. District Court and said Young was denied the leeway that should be afforded to a non-lawyer representing himself.

"I didn't think he got a fair shake," Beck said. "We got to know each other very well. I know his family now. I consider him a good friend as well as a client."

The NRA turned down a request to help with the case, Beck said, declining to elaborate. The NRA was still involved in assisting another lawsuit challenging carry laws when Young filed his suit, which is why the association did not get involved, spokeswoman Amy Hunter said.

On July 24, Young scored his first victory. In a 2-1 ruling, a three-judge panel of the normally liberal 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found
[URL='http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2018/07/24/12-17808.pdf']here
Young has a Second Amendment right to carry a firearm in public. The NRA applauded the ruling.[/URL]
[URL='https://twitter.com/share?url=http%3a%2f%2fa.msn.com%2f01%2fen-us%2fBBLE6v8%3focid%3dst&text=Unlikely+pair+could+usher+gun+rights+case+to+U.S.+Supreme+Court&original_referer=http%3a%2f%2fa.msn.com%2f01%2fen-us%2fBBLE6v8%3focid%3dst']
Hawaii has until September 14th to ask the case to be reheard by the same panel or "en banc" by a larger number of judges.

The state has defended its law by citing the 2008 and 2010 Supreme Court cases, District of Colombia v. Heller and McDonald v. City of Chicago. While those rulings were taken as a victory by gun-rights advocates, proponents of gun control say the court also established limits to the Second Amendment.

"Heller was not intended to extend the protections found in the Second Amendment to any area outside the home," Hawaii said in a 2013 filing in the case.


.

[/URL]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hey Shooter, don't know if it's just me or what, but only half the article is showing. Can you re-post it?
 
Tom, are you able to read the entire article?
Of course he can't.
Our buddy Shooter13 had a little help with his post courtesy of MSN and Twitter.
Once you dare to pull back the curtain just a little and take a peek at the HTML.... it's obvious why:rolleyes::
HiddenPost1.JPG


These are things you shouldn't see because we say so!
go crazy.gif
 
Hey Supp, by now you should know that I'm the dumb one in the group! In fact I think I rode the "Little Bus" to school, if they had them back then!:eek:

I have absolutely no idea as to what you just posted or what it means?:eek:

I'm gonna run back to the "Little Bus", cause I'm scared of the big boys that ride the big bus!:eek:
 
Hey Supp, by now you should know that I'm the dumb one in the group! In fact I think I rode the "Little Bus" to school, if they had them back then!:eek:

I have absolutely no idea as to what you just posted or what it means?:eek:

I'm gonna run back to the "Little Bus", cause I'm scared of the big boys!:eek:
Nonsense! You're just not a hopeless nerd.... which is not a bad thing:rolleyes:.
Every page you view on the web is your browser interpreting a HTML file.
I only showed the HTML file of Shooter's post and it's obvious why his link was hidden when everybody's browser shows it.
Censorship (not by this forum of course) is better when nobody can see it. (like his link)
I, of course, have no problem at all peeking at underwear... Especially if they are dirty and need to be changed:assspank:.
 
Can I have my Crayons back please?
Yes you may.
Now take the bright red one out and write:
The Ninth Circuit of Appeals has confirmed that the second amendment protects the right of a law-abiding citizen to carry (bear) arms for self-defense outside of their home.

There's about 10 million California liberals now saying:
panic.gif


This (pardon pun) shoots a giant hole in their "No Guns Allowed Anywhere" policy.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The LIBERAL AS ALL HELL 9th Circuit stated that !!

Because...for once...the were "interpreting the law" instead of "preaching from the bench"...

.
 
Don't cha just love it!:great:
It's a shame we're not set up in a business to supply 'Depends' to liberal bed-wetters:pee:.
We'd be floating in cash:D!
 

Latest posts

Back
Top