PDA

View Full Version : So now that we have Nordyke, will we see another challenge to the state AWB?


Sleepy1988
05-02-2009, 1:42 PM
Will we see another Silveira type case challenging the state AWB? The AWB was found to pass constitutional muster because the 9th claimed that the second amendment was a "collective right", but now since they've reversed that position, wouldn't a new challenge to the AWB be successful?

lockandloadllc
05-02-2009, 1:56 PM
I sure hope so, Im wanting an M4 without a button of some kind

JDay
05-02-2009, 2:06 PM
I'll be happy when we can get NFA items in this state. Even happier if the NFA ever gets struck down.

gn3hz3ku1*
05-02-2009, 2:11 PM
let's do this one step at a time.. first NERF then whatever else Gene and Bill got planned.

7x57
05-02-2009, 2:35 PM
Will we see another Silveira type case challenging the state AWB? The AWB was found to pass constitutional muster because the 9th claimed that the second amendment was a "collective right", but now since they've reversed that position, wouldn't a new challenge to the AWB be successful?

The answer is yes, but it's probably second or third on the agenda. We can't jump the gun, for many reasons, and need to go in the order that our lawyers say gives us the best chances of success.

But rest assured none of the big league players (NRA, Calguns, CRPA) are going to leave the ban unchallenged.

7x57

Shotgun Man
05-02-2009, 2:40 PM
let's do this one step at a time.. first NERF then whatever else Gene and Bill got planned.

Why wait? Winning the roster suit will likely not affect long arms.

The only reason to wait is lack of resources, i.e., the good lawyers may be only to fight one case at a time.

I think the AWB is ripe for a current challenge.

hoffmang
05-02-2009, 2:42 PM
The very simple reason to wait a short amount of time is to bring an AW case when we have a few more wins under 2A theories under our collective belts.

Handguns have clear protections from Heller so we expand there first.

Rest assured that I too want the AW ban challenged. However, there is a way to virtually guarantee success and a way to go too early and have high risk.

-Gene

HunterJim
05-02-2009, 3:27 PM
I have been going around all week with a "California has a 2nd Amendment smile" all week, so you guys keep working the plan. ;)

And thank you!

jim

7x57
05-02-2009, 3:31 PM
there is a way to virtually guarantee success and a way to go too early and have high risk.


And I assume everyone is willing to wait a bit in order to virtually guarantee success, right?

They took away our rights and the Constitution over a century. We can wait--every day they have that awful feeling of not knowing when and where the hammer falls. Revenge is a dish best served cold. And winning is the best revenge of all.

7x57

aileron
05-02-2009, 3:49 PM
And I assume everyone is willing to wait a bit in order to virtually guarantee success, right?

They took away our rights and the Constitution over a century. We can wait--every day they have that awful feeling of not knowing when and where the hammer falls. Revenge is a dish best served cold. And winning is the best revenge of all.

7x57

Kinda missing the pinky when saying that....

http://www.mauchle.name/images/dr-evil.jpg

bombadillo
05-02-2009, 3:55 PM
I just can't wait for the roster to be deemed unconstitutional!! That will bring a tear to my eye.

7x57
05-02-2009, 4:26 PM
I just can't wait for the roster to be deemed unconstitutional!! That will bring a tear to my eye.

Yep. First state gun law struck down as Unconstitutional, at least in the modern era. (I wonder what happened earlier, say in the antebellum era?)

We should make a calendar of Second Amendment holidays. For the Revolutionary era, we'd have Lexington & Concord of course, perhaps another date or two for notable militia performance in the war (as opposed to the more usual heavy lifting by the Continental army). For the modern era, Heller, Nordyke, and hopefully many more to come.

This may be controversial, but I'd put Harper's Ferry there as well.

7x57

Cobrafreak
05-02-2009, 4:31 PM
I just can't wait for the roster to be deemed unconstitutional!! That will bring a tear to my eye.

Amen Brother! I will drink to that! :thumbsup:

Flogger23m
05-02-2009, 5:36 PM
How long will it take for the AWB to be challenged? I am just wondering. Are we looking at 2-3 years, or longer? I know there is no real answer to the question, but I would like to hear some good guesses from those who know how the process ect. works.

Sleepy1988
05-02-2009, 5:49 PM
And I assume everyone is willing to wait a bit in order to virtually guarantee success, right?

They took away our rights and the Constitution over a century. We can wait--every day they have that awful feeling of not knowing when and where the hammer falls. Revenge is a dish best served cold. And winning is the best revenge of all.

7x57

We may not be able to wait. If Obama gets a second term (heaven forbid), it would probably be best to try and bring a challenge to a state AWB to the supreme court while the composition is most favorable. Hopefully a win against a state AWB in the supreme court would prohibit any new federal bans as well.

BroncoBob
05-02-2009, 5:51 PM
We've waited this long, let's make sure that it is done right just like Gene says.

ColetheGun
05-02-2009, 6:00 PM
i cant wait till we can buy out of state with no hassle! i cant wait to feel like california is a state, not its own western nation that can put all other states below it

hoffmang
05-02-2009, 7:57 PM
It would be really nice to have the 2008 ATF manufacture data available (which doesn't happen until early 2010.)

It's not two weeks, but its not going to be very long at all.

-Gene

1BigPea
05-02-2009, 8:08 PM
The very simple reason to wait a short amount of time is to bring an AW case when we have a few more wins under 2A theories under our collective belts.

Handguns have clear protections from Heller so we expand there first.

Rest assured that I too want the AW ban challenged. However, there is a way to virtually guarantee success and a way to go too early and have high risk.

-Gene

You couldn't have said it better...gets me all giddy. Let's welcome Heller to California! :thumbsup:

Suvorov
05-02-2009, 8:09 PM
I have full faith in Gene and the rest of the folks at the helm, but I still can not understand how a judgement that was made (the AW challenge) due to the collective interpretation, does not automatically become invalid when the High Court goes rules against the collective interpretation. :confused:

hoffmang
05-02-2009, 8:15 PM
I have full faith in Gene and the rest of the folks at the helm, but I still can not understand how a judgement that was made (the AW challenge) due to the collective interpretation, does not automatically become invalid when the High Court goes rules against the collective interpretation. :confused:

Silveira is dead. However, you still have to challenge the laws anew. It is as if Silveira never happened.

Also, there are slightly better ways to dismantle the AW laws than the attack Silveira made.

-Gene

7x57
05-02-2009, 8:47 PM
It would be really nice to have the 2008 ATF manufacture data available (which doesn't happen until early 2010.)


Oh ho. I smell "commonly owned by Americans" data for EBRs. :43:


It's not two weeks, but its not going to be very long at all.


Yeah, sure, Gene, it's always "two weeks" with you isn't it? Waitaminnit...he said...what did he say? He didn't say "two weeks"? He specifically said "it's not two weeks?" My entire worldview is crumbling. :chris:

Unless...yeah. OK, who are you and why did you hack into Gene's account? Nobody's going to believe your lame attempts at impersonation so long as you say stuff like that. ;)

7x57

7x57
05-02-2009, 8:51 PM
Silveira is dead. However, you still have to challenge the laws anew. It is as if Silveira never happened.


I assume the point is that Silveria ==> AWB legal does not imply !Silveria ==> AWB not legal, but rather we can conclude nothing from !Silveria.

Lawyers understand simple predicate logic. Who knew? :eek:


Also, there are slightly better ways to dismantle the AW laws than the attack Silveira made.


I'm so glad we're not represented by the law firm of Larry, Moe, and Curly like we used to be. :)

7x57

JDay
05-02-2009, 8:52 PM
Oh ho. I smell "commonly owned by Americans" data for EBRs. :43:

Just have to look at the data from after the federal ban expired.

Librarian
05-02-2009, 9:26 PM
I have full faith in Gene and the rest of the folks at the helm, but I still can not understand how a judgement that was made (the AW challenge) due to the collective interpretation, does not automatically become invalid when the High Court goes rules against the collective interpretation. :confused:

Nothing is ever 'automatic'.

You need an active 'case or controversy', a lawsuit or a criminal trial, in which a court can apply the new decision.

For example, except for a few strange people these days, it isn't possible to seek damages from having been enslaved before the 13th Amendment - the behavior was legal before it became illegal. So, too, with cases completed under prior interpretations of other law - those were 'good law' at the time.

yellowfin
05-02-2009, 9:41 PM
I'm guessing things will continue to the "this one is legal but this one that is the same thing isn't" pattern.

Librarian
05-02-2009, 9:45 PM
Just have to look at the data from after the federal ban expired.

The BATF "AFMER" reports do not break down rifles more finely than by manufacturer. In a few cases, we can be pretty sure that the bulk of the rifles were of the 'AR-persuasion'.

For example, in 2006, about 1.5 million rifles were manufactured, of which 102K were exported.

Bushmaster in AZ manufactured about 3K
Bushmaster in ME, about 57K
Stag in CT about 22K
Armalite in NY about 11K
Rock River in IL about 17K
DPMS in MN about 47K
Vulcan about 6K
Colt Defense about 8K
Olympic about 7K

So, presuming those manufacturers produced nearly all 'AR-type' rifles, they account for roughly 12% of the total.

I know Remington produced some 'AR-type', and probably I don't recognize many of the 'lower' manufacturers.

Still, >10% of a yearly total seems relatively 'common' to me.

JDay
05-02-2009, 10:34 PM
The BATF "AFMER" reports do not break down rifles more finely than by manufacturer. In a few cases, we can be pretty sure that the bulk of the rifles were of the 'AR-persuasion'.

For example, in 2006, about 1.5 million rifles were manufactured, of which 102K were exported.

Bushmaster in AZ manufactured about 3K
Bushmaster in ME, about 57K
Stag in CT about 22K
Armalite in NY about 11K
Rock River in IL about 17K
DPMS in MN about 47K
Vulcan about 6K
Colt Defense about 8K
Olympic about 7K

So, presuming those manufacturers produced nearly all 'AR-type' rifles, they account for roughly 12% of the total.

I know Remington produced some 'AR-type', and probably I don't recognize many of the 'lower' manufacturers.

Still, >10% of a yearly total seems relatively 'common' to me.

Not to mention that AR style rifles are only one type of "assault weapon".

tiki
05-03-2009, 5:37 AM
We may not be able to wait. If Obama gets a second term (heaven forbid), it would probably be best to try and bring a challenge to a state AWB to the supreme court while the composition is most favorable. Hopefully a win against a state AWB in the supreme court would prohibit any new federal bans as well.

I agree. Whatever we get until Obama replaces one of the Heller 5 is as far as we are likely to get. It appears from what I have read and heard that Obama will not only go after anti 2nd Amendment justices, but, anti Constitution and Bill of Rights justices. According to him, both documents are outdated and don't hold relevance in the one world theory.

TripleT
05-03-2009, 5:56 AM
So if I'm following the logic correctly, every EBR we buy / build is helping with the numbers to establish commonanilty ?

If so, I am happy to report I am doing my best to boost the numbers !

Soldier415
05-03-2009, 6:12 AM
So if I'm following the logic correctly, every EBR we buy / build is helping with the numbers to establish commonanilty ?

If so, I am happy to report I am doing my best to boost the numbers !
LOL.

I like the way you think.

bombadillo
05-03-2009, 7:06 AM
Ha, i've done my part 5 times this past year! For some reason, I can't get them all completed though, I keep buying and selling.

nicki
05-03-2009, 10:01 AM
Silveira is dead. However, you still have to challenge the laws anew. It is as if Silveira never happened.

Also, there are slightly better ways to dismantle the AW laws than the attack Silveira made.

-Gene



Silveria may be dead, but it is not useless. Thanks to Silveria we have a track record of the type of crap that the 9th circuit would do, as such, we can tailor our case against their arguements.

Rather than speculate what they would try, we now know what they tried.

Yes, it may be now a "dead case", and for "legal and precendent matters', it is as though it never happened. but for strategic purposes, IMHO opinion, it provides us useful information on the justices we are dealing with.

BTW, as I understand it, the court actually agreeed with Gorski on "equal protection issues" and said California couldn't give LEO's opportunity to register private AW's that were not made available to the rest of us.

Nicki

hoffmang
05-03-2009, 10:21 AM
Silveria may be dead, but it is not useless.

There is one footnote in Silveira that is useful. Otherwise, it's a useless case now. I actually expect Reinhardt to take Heller seriously in a way many others on his side will not. You can see that in his opposition to the en banc decision in Fischer where he sided with the gun nut quoting the fourth amendment out of his NRA civil rights primer.

-Gene

ilbob
05-03-2009, 11:01 AM
My concern with waiting is that a very bad case may get filed by someone unwilling to wait.

7x57
05-03-2009, 12:11 PM
My concern with waiting is that a very bad case may get filed by someone unwilling to wait.

While I agree that's a real worry (cough cough Maloney cough), I think lawsuits will be filed as rapidly as feasible. Gene for one let us in on how he feels about it (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?p=2233816#post2233816). Here is a picture of Gene before Nordyke, contemplating future federal lawsuits:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/nature/wildfacts/factfiles/picpops/images/lion22.jpg

Gene's fangs really don't seem that large in person though. ;)

7x57