Nebraska CCW

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

mattd

Member
Joined
May 8, 2003
Messages
446
Location
South Omaha
Ernie Chambers said(on public access tv) he is going to hold the ccw bill for hostage. So why hasn't anyone take all the Nebraska gun laws to the NE supreme court?
 
I don't get your post. WTH are you talking about?

I have heard of nothing in the way of movement here on any CCW law. Even if there were someone who was willing to "... take all the Nebraska gun laws to the NE supreme court" it takes money, dinero, wampum, the coin of the realm to do so.

I'll do it if anyone here wants to front me the $50,000 to start -- note I said start -- such an action. That'll get us through the first step of the four or five we will have to go through.
 
Henry, behold the power of THR. Ask and ye shall receive:

"All persons are by nature free and independent, and have certain inherent and inalienable rights; among these are . . . the right to keep and bear arms for security or defense of self, family, home, and others, and for lawful common defense, hunting, recreational use, and for all other lawful purposes, and such rights shall not be denied or infringed by the state or any subdivision thereof." NEB. CONST. art. I, § 1.

Sounds like pretty strong language to me. Of course, Courts can always say that rights are dependent upon the majority, but then what good are BoRs then?:scrutiny:
 
We can open carry but the law specifically outlaws CCW.

From findlaw.com: http://statutes.unicam.state.ne.us/Corpus/statutes/chap28/R2812002.html

28-1202
Carrying concealed weapon; penalty; affirmative defense.

(1) Except as provided in subsection (2) of this section, any person who carries a weapon or weapons concealed on or about his or her person such as a revolver, pistol, bowie knife, dirk or knife with a dirk blade attachment, brass or iron knuckles, or any other deadly weapon commits the offense of carrying a concealed weapon.

(2) It shall be an affirmative defense that the defendant was engaged in any lawful business, calling, or employment at the time he or she was carrying any weapon or weapons and the circumstances in which such person was placed at the time were such as to justify a prudent person in carrying the weapon or weapons for the defense of his or her person, property, or family.

(3) Carrying a concealed weapon is a Class I misdemeanor.

(4) In the case of a second or subsequent conviction under this section, carrying a concealed weapon is a Class IV felony.

Source:
Laws 1977, LB 38, § 234; Laws 1984, LB 1095, § 1.
Annotations:
In order to be a deadly weapon per se under subsection (1) of this section, the weapon must be one specifically enumerated in the statute. Whether an object or weapon not specifically named in the statute is a deadly weapon is a question of fact to be determined by the trier of fact, and the resolution of that fact question will depend on the evidence adduced as to the use or intended use of the object or weapon. State v. Williams, 218 Neb. 57, 352 N.W.2d 576 (1984).

Whether an object or weapon not specifically enumerated in subsection (1) of this section was a deadly weapon is a question of fact to be decided by the trier of fact. State v. Kanger, 215 Neb. 128, 337 N.W.2d
422 (1983).

Section 28-1202(1), R.S.Supp.,1978, combined with the definition of "deadly weapon" found in section 28-109, R.S.Supp.,1978, is sufficiently definite to meet the requirements of the first and fifth amendments to the U.S. Constitution and Art. I, section 3, of the Nebraska Constitution. State v. Valencia, 205 Neb. 719, 290 N.W.2d 181.
Click to expand...
 
Why does it cost so much to start?
Click to expand...
I have no reason as to why it costs so much to contestn what is ours to contest in the first place. The lawyer's fees are outrageous to begin with and then there are the filings, briefs, research, paralegals, phone calls, travel to the court of jurisdiction, etc. It all adds up.

The problem is that there are so many steps involved. First you go to the lower court which gets appealed to the state supreme court three judge panel and then to the full panel if you're lucky and then to the USSC. By the time you're done, you have spent over a million dollars with no guaranteed outcome or even that the high court will hear the case. They may throw the case out because you lack standing or any other reason they feel like using to avoid having to rule on something they have a personal agenda against or are unwilling to go against the popular opinion.

This is why we have so many laws that have been in place, and even used as precedent, and have been unchallenged because of the simple lack of funds to challenge them.
 
The lawyer's fees are outrageous to begin with and then there are the filings, briefs, research, paralegals, phone calls, travel to the court of jurisdiction, etc. It all adds up.
Click to expand...

You can cut out the lawyers, research, paralegals, you don't need to call anyone but if you do, local calls are free and 10cent a minute for long distance? and don't need to travel very far if you live close by.

By USSC Im guessing you mean United States Supreme Court, I didn't know you needed to goto the ussc to challenge a State Law. But Im sure they will throw the case out if you have no clue what you are doing. I think this would be a open and shut case because the Nebraska Constitution is pretty clear about the right to bear arms.
 
You can cut out the lawyers, research, paralegals, you don't need to call anyone but if you do, local calls are free and 10cent a minute for long distance? and don't need to travel very far if you live close by.
Click to expand...
There is an assumption that one would be able to take on a major civil rights/constitutional issue pro per. There still needs to be research done as there may be precedent that exists that will help or hinder your side. You can bet your sweet one that the other side is going to do their homework and it is not a good thing to have them spring something devastating to your side in court. SURPRISE!!

The phone calls are free or small fee only in the aspect of doing so oneself. If a lawyer is on board, the calls go up to $150/hr.

If he has to go to the court of jurisdiction, he will charge you for that, too.

By USSC Im guessing you mean United States Supreme Court, I didn't know you needed to goto the ussc to challenge a State Law. But Im sure they will throw the case out if you have no clue what you are doing. I think this would be a open and shut case because the Nebraska Constitution is pretty clear about the right to bear arms.
Click to expand...
Yes, USSC means that. If you were to win on the state level, the chances are that the state would elevate the case to the USSC as a state's "right" issue. They would claim that the right of the state legislature to make laws modifying constitutional law is their "right". They would claim that the constitutional law is upheld because there is no abolition of a person's right to carry a firearm oopenly; and the CCW statute modifies the constitutional law to bear arms in the same manner that the prohibition of shouting "Fire!" in a theater modifys the constitutional right to free speech.
 
Let me get this straight:

It's a state with a guaranteed right to open-carry, but no CCW?

The solution is rather obvious, ain't it?

Get ALL the gunnies to pack openly, as often as possible, with guns as big and obnoxious as possible :evil: for the *purpose* of causing as much "sheeple freakout" as possible until the legislature caves in and sets up CCW.
 
I know that the lawsuit in Ohio was started by the Second Amendment Foundation and later supported by the NRA. JPFO is an educational group and the Second Amendment Sisters are one heck of a Public Relations gun group. That leaves the GOA.

Since we're all aware of the criticism by the members of the GOA toward the NRA because of claims they either don't do "enough" or they somehow don't do the right thing. Why don't members of the GOA insist that they sue the state of Nebraska?

This is exactly what I had asked when the Ohio lawsuit was first filed. Are there any members of the GOA who can push this idea forward? If not Nebraska, why not Kansas? The State of Kansas also has a good RKBA amendment.
 
Keep and Bear arms has a special part of their web site to bash the NRA http://www.keepandbeararms.com/NRA

I think the solution is to get a Nebraska Lawyer to take a case to the court pro bono. Or at least get one of the 100 gun organizations to at least give a little financial support.
 
The Ohio suit is indeed based on a state Constitutional clause very similar to the Nebraska RKBA clause. Since the Ohio Supremes will be ruling fairly soon, a win there may finally convince the Nebraska legislature to solve the problem before an inevitable court loss.

Upshot: wait to sue until the Ohio ruling comes in, and use that for support.
 
mattd, that's exactly what I'm talking about. There's always someone complaining about the NRA but they can't seem to do something without their help.

The Minnesota organization asked for the NRA's help for the final push and the Minnesota CCW law passed.
Let's see the GOA do something in Kansas or Nebraska without the NRA's help.

That way they can get the credit and show everyone all that talk can lead to action.
 
The Nebraska bill is so bad, it's amazing that you keep pushing it. You'd be better off to build political clout for the '04 election and come back with a decent bill.
 
It would be nice for the NRA to start actually protecting the right to keep and bear arms rather then the privilege.

And I don't think anyone in this post was pushing the Nebraska Ccw bill.
 
It would help if the GOA showed everyone what they can do instead of worrying about what the NRA does or doesn't do.

I posted about a year ago that the GOA could pick any state that has a Second Amendment and change that state's gun laws. So what's the problem? They could do exactly what the SAF and the NRA are doing in Ohio.
 
I'm saying prove to me that another gun group is better than the NRA by actions and not cute advertising sayings.

Any group out there can simply do something and prove that they can do the job without the NRA. Any group.

I would love it if some other group can do better than the NRA. That way the members can use their membership money to build ranges like the Wittington Center in every state.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

M
  • Locked
Can We Talk About Ernie Chambers Now?
Replies
5
Views
594
SomeKid
S
O
  • Locked
CCW for Nebraska Forum
Replies
3
Views
315
Firethorn
F
G
  • Locked
Kansas and Nebraska CCW
Replies
8
Views
797
tulsamal
T
C
  • Locked
2004 Nebraska concealed carry proposal
Replies
3
Views
516
cmzneb
C
D
  • Locked
CCW Nebraska...Help
Replies
17
Views
878
Z-Michigan
Z
Back
Top