From: David L Olofson
Subject: DRO'S CASE: NO, ALL GUN OWNERS
Date: Monday, October 12, 2009, 6:03 PM
To all of David’s friends and extended family,
It has been too long between updates. This is very difficult to write on the eve of pending news. The last news for the courts was like someone ripping a piece of our soul from us and we have not recovered. I truly hope and pray this time is not the same.
If I have forgotten someone, or email addresses have changed, I apologize, and please forward this to those who care and should care. But after sitting at the Fdl gun show this weekend, looking to distribute and disseminate information on David’s case, it was all too obvious that even to the gun enthusiasts and gun owners, the impact of David’s case is not recognized. This is sad. The laws on the books will make no difference if this verdict stands. I am afraid that this will give the government a blank check, and we will all pay the price.
I have attached the two briefs submitted to the US Supreme Court. The first submitted by William J. Olson, Attorneys at Law.
And can be found at their web site: http://www.lawandfreedom.com
We cannot thank enough the GOA’s support (http:www.gunowners.org), and to those who have contributed to the support effort, and the support and excellent work that Herb Titus and the attorney’s at William Olson’s have done.
If you go to www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/09-256.htm you can see the docket of David’s case. On Aug 28 the Petition for a writ was filed, the first attachment. As Herb put it, this was just the first step to get review on the merits and the court has complete discretion to say no to our petition. The Supreme Court has distributed David's Petition, on 09.16, to the justices and scheduled it to be considered at its conference on October 9. We were anticipating one or two friend-of-the- court briefs supporting the petition and was filed by September 30. This is the second attachment, an important amicus brief that was authored by Second Amendment attorneys David T. Hardy (http://armsand thelaw.com) and E. Stewart Rhodes (http:oathkeepers.org/oath/) for the Montana Shooting Sports Association and the Virginia Citizens Defense League. After filing, those briefs were distributed to the justices in time for them to review the briefs before the October 9 conference. These were just the first steps to get review on the merits. The court has complete discretion to say no to our petition. We cannot thank them enough for their support. Lord willing we will get the needed 4 votes out of the 9 justices. Look at the courts link above 10.13.
We are praying that 4 of the justices will show more common sense than those federal judges that have reviewed this case to date. David's petition will not be the only matter on the justices' October 9 agenda. With respect to David's Petition, the justices could make several decisions, the two most likely being: 1) Deny the petition; or 2) Request the Solicitor General to respond to the petition (thus far, the Solicitor General has waived the government's right to respond). If the justices request a response from the Solicitor General, the Court would set a time for that response, after which we would have an opportunity to reply. You can note from the docket the government’s response was due 09.30, although waived??. Anyone in the real business world would have been fired for showing such indiscretions as they have done throughout this case, and to the Supreme Court??? If it is denied, well it is all over and I’m afraid it is the beginning of the end for the freedom we now have in the possession multiple cartridge firearms. If they are to consider it we all need to pick up the phone and call everyone we know and have them call their government reps and tell them this is not acceptable!
To quote from the first petition: ‘David’s conviction, if left standing, threatens countless other law-abiding citizens with becoming “felons-by-chance” should their firearm malfunction while exercising their right to keep and bear arms secured by the Second Amendment. Only the detail and precision of a Staples definition of “automatically” can protect the constitutional right to own a semi-automatic against arbitrary government classification, leading to seizure, prosecution, incarceration, and a lifetime ban on firearm ownership’.
To quote from the second: ‘If a gun owner has a firearm that malfunctions there is no remedy or safe harbor. Even if corrected then gives it to his son or grandson, and it happens again, can he be prosecuted’? According to this verdict yes he can, we all can!! —as stated in this verdict: NO MATTER WHAT THE CAUSE!
For those who would like to put a face to this case, see the photo attached. This was from a visit to Sandstone we took one weekend. It includes his family; Candy, Sophia, David, Isabella, and Alex. David wanted us to share it with his friends.
Thank you all for your prayers and support.
Dave & Pat Olofson
And from the Spectral Eminence Grise of Sipsey Street, a question:
"So, tell me, what does that scabrous-hearted harridan Jody Keeku have for breakfast?"