New Mexico governor issues order to suspend open and concealed carry of guns in Albuquerque

[Leadeye]

I'll be curious to see if there is any enforcement of her order at all. Much like the fall of the Berlin Wall, it all depends on what the man with the gun decides to do.

 

[JAL]

Instead of anger and resorting to Magical Thinking of some God in a Machine coming to save the day, why doesn't INGO join our fellow citizens in NM and get in the fight?

I am joining as a Sustaining Individual Member.

INGO, follow me!

Membership | New Mexico Shooting Sports Association

nmssa.org

I'm doing my part! Are you? (with the New Mexico Shooting Sports Assn.)
See the link in the quote above. Lawsuits aren't free -- even if done pro bono -- with all the filing fees. I've been through several litigations. The courts and their online systems nickel, dime and quarter you at every turn.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

I'm doing my part! Are you? (with the New Mexico Shooting Sports Assn.)
See the link in the quote above. Lawsuits aren't free -- even if done pro bono -- with all the filing fees. I've been through several litigations. The courts and their online systems nickel, dime and quarter you at every turn.

Kirk doing his part . . . standing behind Sky Marshal holding the reins of his horse.

 

[bwframe]

My best guess is the judge is letting the dust settle on the initial dogpile so he can consolidate the cases. In the meantime, the PD Chief, Sheriff and local Prosecutor have all publicly stated they're not enforcing it. The NM State Police, which the Governor ordered to enforce it in the absence of locals doing it has yet to act. Nobody has been cited yet. If anyone is, that would be huge news. Thus, the level of extreme urgency that would be present if people were being cited, doesn't exist. I don't think the judge will let it plod and slog along at a slow pace though. Defendant's haven't filed a thing yet. If the judge issued a TRO now, it would be ex parte, i.e. without a response by the defendants or allowing them oral argument. That would be very highly unusual, and among the grounds for appealing the TRO to the Circuit Court.

As always, thanks for the info!

The problem I see with agency's not enforcing (which is a cool move on their part,) is that while they might not actively enforce, charges could be filed as an addition to help paint questionable people/situations in a bad light?

While law enforcement may not act on persons carrying in this supposed banned area, where does that leave a carrier who might use their pistol in self defense while in that zone? What will a zealous anti-gun prosecutor do with that? What will happen to the carrier's proper person status in relation to their carry permission?

While police agencies saying they won't enforce illegal laws is great, the concern has always been that the agency may not have the final say in charges? Especially when combined with laundry list of other charges to make something big out of something small?

 

[jwamplerusa]

I'll be curious to see if there is any enforcement of her order at all. Much like the fall of the Berlin Wall, it all depends on what the man with the gun decides to do.

This is in reality, at least there, a decent indication of how many armed state actors will "follow their orders". So far, it looks promising that the "man with the gun" still has an allegiance to their oath, and not the tyrant.

 

[bobzilla]

This is in reality, at least there, a decent indication of how many armed state actors will "follow their orders". So far, it looks promising that the "man with the gun" still has an allegiance to their oath, and not the tyrant.

I mean, they may be playing lip service or only doing it to not get sued, but I'll take that over the "just following orders" any day of the week. Ideally they wouldn't do it because it's against the constitution and natural rights of the citizens, but if they do it because they don't want to get sued that's still a win. Maybe with enough of those they can start to see the real reasons they shouldn't follow orders.

 

[DadSmith]

"Last week, as I'm sitting here as the sitting sheriff, I get a phone call that my brother also was a victim of gun violence last week that many of you do not know.
He and my nephew were sitting in their car when they were shot at, and their vehicle was impacted by numerous rounds. How can I, as a sheriff, tell him to put his firearms away and not be able to protect himself?"

 

[Leadeye]

I mean, they may be playing lip service or only doing it to not get sued, but I'll take that over the "just following orders" any day of the week. Ideally they wouldn't do it because it's against the constitution and natural rights of the citizens, but if they do it because they don't want to get sued that's still a win. Maybe with enough of those they can start to see the real reasons they shouldn't follow orders.

I agree, in 1989 it didn't make any difference how the border guards decided to interpret the events. What was important was that they did not obey Honecker, and did not shoot the people crossing the border.

When that happened, socialist leadership in East Germany ceased to mean anything.

 

[Twangbanger]

Does lack of enforcement undercut the cases? In other words, does it have to be enforced for a plaintiff to show harm?

If there's no criminal arrests, and no civil monies change hands, it's hard for a non-lawyer to discern what "there" is there.

Does somebody need to get mugged or worse?

 

[Alamo]

I'm doing my part! Are you? (with the New Mexico Shooting Sports Assn.)

I’m in. Just a regular annual membership though, I’m not a wheeler-dealer highfalutin‘ lawyer with a stately manor, like some people. Just a grumpy retired guy.

 

[loudgroove]

I think some of you photoshop gurus need to take Trumps mugshot and put this Governer in it. Thats the mugshot We the People need to see lol

 

[actaeon277]

So.. listening to ANOTHER video, I maybe paid better attention.

She (the Governor) stated 'violent crime rates of greater than 1k per 100k citizens', or something like that.
But for sure, it was 'violent crime' and '1k per 100k'.


Well, guns are NOT the only tool of violence.
Hands/Fist/Feet
Blunt objects, bats, lumber, etc
Sharp objects, knives, etc.
AUTOMOBILES.


So
Where are the limitations on those?
How about telling the population that NO MOTORIZED VEHICLES will be allowed in the same counties/cities.

How about the rest?

 

[DragonGunner]

I think some of you photoshop gurus need to take Trumps mugshot and put this Governer in it. Thats the mugshot We the People need to see lol

This is all I got for now…lol.

 

[actaeon277]

Here's an idea.

If she can choose to ignore rules set forth in the Constitution, then.. since her job description is set forth in her State Constitution, we can choose to ignore her office.

That's the way it works isn't it?

 

[JAL]

Hearing on TRO Set for 1PM MDT / 3PM EDT Tomorrow, 13 September

See Item #7 in the Document Minute Entries (no document to download; entry speaks for itself)
This is the Donk v. Grisham lawsuit brought by GOA/GOF -- same judge is assigned to all the others.

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67779443/donk-v-grisham/

7 -- Sep 12, 2023 -- NOTICE of Hearing on Motion 2 MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order : Motion Hearing set for 9/13/2023 at 01:00 PM in Albuquerque - 420 Mimbres Courtroom before District Judge David H. Urias. (jmg)
[THIS IS A TEXT-ONLY ENTRY. THERE ARE NO DOCUMENTS ATTACHED.] (Entered: 09/12/2023)

Emphasis is mine.

This one is clearly on a Mach 10 Docket Rocket.

 

[Alamo]

Hearing on TRO Set for 1PM MDT / 3PM EDT Tomorrow, 13 September

See Item #7 in the Document Minute Entries (no document to download; entry speaks for itself)
This is the Donk v. Grisham lawsuit brought by GOA/GOF -- same judge is assigned to all the others.

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67779443/donk-v-grisham/


Emphasis is mine.

This one is clearly on a Mach 10 Docket Rocket.

From what I just saw on Twitter, that’s not the only case that will be considered at 1 PM tomorrow.

NAGR, Patriots USA, and Blas also.

 

[Route 45]

 

[miguel]

I'll be curious to see if there is any enforcement of her order at all. Much like the fall of the Berlin Wall, it all depends on what the man with the gun decides to do.

BING-THE-MRFN-GO!

Just like speeding, alot of people do alot of things against the law. Over time I think we've gone from a society that believes "We've got to keep criminals in line!" to "What difference does it make?" (not intending to quote the Old Hag...)

When die Mauer fell, it was still within DDR security forces mandate to enforce existing DDR law. But they didn't, because they could see the writing on the wall. (at least if they went to the western side...<cough>)

I don't think the USA is there yet, but we're creeping up on it with a quickening cadence.

 

[fullmetaljesus]

Agreed (politicians in general). There should be personal penalties for politicians that put in place executive orders, etc that blatantly are unconstitutional.

Try them for treason and then escort them to the gallows on the public square.

 

[WebSnyper]

Try them for treason and then escort them to the gallows on the public square.

I'd be happy with them facing charges for violating constitutional rights, same as is brought against police when they do so, except it should be a charge for every citizen whose rights they violate.