PDA

View Full Version : Safe Handgun Roster to Get 12031 declared unneccessary


Theseus
04-23-2009, 10:39 AM
Just a thought.

Part of the "reason" 12031 is in place is the argument that a loaded gun in public poses a safety hazard, perhaps because the gun might accidentally go off and such.

Can we argue that since the roster of safe firearms exists that ensures handguns are safe that there is then also no need for the 12031?

Can we also further produce facts that put (e) checks as unsafe because it causes a potentially loaded gun to be handled increasing more of a threat to public safety than if the potentially loaded gun were left in a holster?

I don't know, it does sound a little silly to use a law we want gone to argue against another law, but doesn't mean that we can't use one to strike another then attack the other one on its own merits.

Untamed1972
04-23-2009, 10:44 AM
I asked this in the other thread about the new SCOTUS ruling on vehicle searches, but now with Nordyke I think the whole "e" check thing needs to be challenged on 4A grounds as illegal search and seizure (the seizure being of my person and my gun if only for a minute or 2)

"I just had a thought while reading this. It was in regards to an officer asking inspecting firearms you have in the truck of your car, like if you were coming back from the range. Wouldn't this ruling make the "e" check of firearms in the trunk of a car illegal if he had no other suspicion that a crime was involved or was not making an arrest? I know the "e" check law says if you refuse to allow the check you are subjec to arrest, but doesn't the "e" check law under this ruling become void at least when your weapons are in the car because the "e" check requires you submit to a search of your vehicle for not other reason then engaging in a completely legal activity?"

Theseus
04-23-2009, 10:49 AM
The problem is that 12031 basically says that the law gives them the PC!

It basically says that if a gun is in a public place it is assumed to be loaded and that is why the search is legal.

lioneaglegriffin
04-23-2009, 11:01 AM
i thought the roster was "Not Unsafe" not "Safe"

Untamed1972
04-23-2009, 11:04 AM
The problem is that 12031 basically says that the law gives them the PC!

It basically says that if a gun is in a public place it is assumed to be loaded and that is why the search is legal.

That's my point though......just because something get's passed into law doesn't mean it's constitutional. And now with Heller & Nordyke it could be challenged that stopping me to check my gun not only violates 2A but then subjects me to an illegal search and seizure because of exercising my 2A right.

That's like passing a law that says if you preach the gospel on the street corner you can be searched w/o cause. Just because they make it a law doesn't mean it's constitutional. There was a time when laws said people of a certain race couldn't eat in resturants or drink from water fountains too. Prior to Heller and Nordyke you didn't have a RKBA, so infringement upon that was accepted. Now we do have that right, and a law that requires you to surrender your 4A rights to exercise your 2A rights can't fly in the long run.

CSDGuy
04-23-2009, 11:16 AM
Interesting plan of attack, but do you have a "Plan B" to fall back on once "The Roster" dies?

Theseus
04-23-2009, 11:22 AM
Don't need it. 12031 Was enacted to prevent the BP from carrying. Once we get 12031 knocked down then I doubt they would have the power to bring it back.

JDay
04-23-2009, 2:19 PM
i thought the roster was "Not Unsafe" not "Safe"

If something is declared to be "Not Unsafe" then by definition it is safe.

N6ATF
04-24-2009, 12:51 AM
If something is declared to be "Not Unsafe" then by definition it is safe.

Big Brother bullcrap. LOL

Flopper
04-24-2009, 11:16 AM
If something is declared to be "Not Unsafe" then by definition it is safe.
this is not true in the same way that "not guilty" does not necessarily mean "innocent."

simple schoolboy
04-24-2009, 11:21 AM
I asked this in the other thread about the new SCOTUS ruling on vehicle searches, but now with Nordyke I think the whole "e" check thing needs to be challenged on 4A grounds as illegal search and seizure (the seizure being of my person and my gun if only for a minute or 2)

"I just had a thought while reading this. It was in regards to an officer asking inspecting firearms you have in the truck of your car, like if you were coming back from the range. Wouldn't this ruling make the "e" check of firearms in the trunk of a car illegal if he had no other suspicion that a crime was involved or was not making an arrest? I know the "e" check law says if you refuse to allow the check you are subjec to arrest, but doesn't the "e" check law under this ruling become void at least when your weapons are in the car because the "e" check requires you submit to a search of your vehicle for not other reason then engaging in a completely legal activity?"

Whats the name of this new SCOTUS finding on searches?

Flopper
04-24-2009, 11:51 AM
Just a thought.

Part of the "reason" 12031 is in place is the argument that a loaded gun in public poses a safety hazard, perhaps because the gun might accidentally go off and such.

if part of the "reason" is because of accidental discharge, couldn't we argue that a mag in the well with no round in the chamber would make it safe?

Librarian
04-24-2009, 12:11 PM
Whats the name of this new SCOTUS finding on searches?
Arizona v Gant
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/07-542.ZO.html
ARIZONA v. GANT (No. 07-542)
216 Ariz. 1, 162 P. 3d 640, affirmed.

Lots of commentary over at Volokh (http://volokh.powerblogs.com/)

hoffmang
04-24-2009, 4:52 PM
Having the roster found unconstitutional will not directly help a challenge to 12031. The roster has nothing to do with safety in reality.

12031 will have to stand or fall on its own merits.

-Gene

wash
04-24-2009, 5:05 PM
He's arguing that a loaded "not unsafe" gun in public does not create a safety hazard so the roster makes 12031 redundant.

If we can keep the roster to kill 12031 and NRF to get the handguns we want, that wouldn't be such a bad outcome although it might limit what you could carry to a rostered handgun.

I don't know if that is the best strategy but it's probably worth investigating.