PDA

View Full Version : Attn: Leagle Eagles


WeThePeople
06-23-2006, 12:55 PM
I have a "friend" that might be willing to fund a suit to get rid of one bad gun law in CA. Yes, this thread ignores one of the best ways to help us...CA gun rights proposition.

If any of you have some real advice, please speak up. If for some reason, you don't think some of this should be discussed in public, let me know.

Does this suit have to go to CA court or could/should we involve a Federal court from the beginning?

Cost of first court? 1st appeal? 2nd appeal? etc.?

Should an individual file? Create a CA corp? Give money to a gun group specifically for this suit?

Which attorney is willing & able to do this. So CA is preferred.

I've intentionally left out suits based on the 2nd & 14 Ammendments.

There was a thread somewhat similar to this a few months ago, but it was mainly about the gun rights prop. I'd like to keep this one focused.


There are all kinds of CA laws on the books. Which one is both offensive to us and possible to change?

1 gun per month...violation of interstate commerce? Is there any other product that is regulated in this way?

Magazine disconnect...safety violation? 1) You can't defend yourself if you can't shoot someone while doing a mag change with a round in the chamber. 2) You can't dry fire with a dummy round and an open mag well. You must insert a magazine which increases the chance of loading a real round sometime during your dry fire exercise.

SB50...there were voting irregularities in the committee process. Other people voted for absent senate/assembly members. http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=100457&highlight=ghost+voting

SB23...another approach this time? Or, at least fight the section that prohibits inheritance? Almost any other heirloom can be passed down to your heirs. Why not guns?

Close the Hollywood loopholes...There are exceptions for Hollywood to buy multiple HGs at one time. I'm sure there are others.

Safety test/approved HG...? CA cars are different, so a unique approach might be needed.

10 round magazine..?

10 day waiting period..? Not needed anymore to eliminate felons from buying. Only possible reason is to delay hot-heads from buying. However, no other item in CA is restricted. You can buy a cheap car from a private party ("the car show loophole") and immediately go run over some kids.

Other laws?

File an overall attack based on the CA Constitution..? It says: 1) the US BOR is the baseline, 2) Each law must apply egually to all citizens. I don't think this would get very far, but it's always possible.

Useful comments?

Bling Bling 2.0
06-23-2006, 2:32 PM
You can buy a cheap car from a private party ("the car show loophole") and immediately go run over some kids.



I always thought it was funny that when I tried to buy lighter fluid for a HS science project they turned me down. Duhh I can go buy GASOLINE for much cheaper (even now).

hoffmang
06-23-2006, 2:37 PM
Right now, the best non 2A case and non OLL case is the import ban on 10 round magazines under Commerce Clause theory.

Its not open and shut, but its the best case going.

PM me if you want me to tell you more.

bwiese
06-23-2006, 2:50 PM
Well, if he wants to fund a real CA gun lawsuit, he should talk to a real CA gun lawyer.

We end up w/screwups and sometimes worsening of the situation when non-gun lawyers try this stuff - look at Kasler and Silviera.

glen avon
06-23-2006, 3:12 PM
I think it would be fascinating to analyze the second amendment in the context of national open carry and from the perspective of a pro-se merchant marine. :eek:

WeThePeople
06-23-2006, 3:40 PM
Well, if he wants to fund a real CA gun lawsuit, he should talk to a real CA gun lawyer.

We end up w/screwups and sometimes worsening of the situation when non-gun lawyers try this stuff - look at Kasler and Silviera.

I agree. That's why I'm asking for a name of a real attorney that is both capable and willing. The last time I talked to the CAL-NRA newsletter smiling-face guy (let's see...let's call him CM), he asked me what a good approach would be. He also said he was too busy. Maybe he's less busy now and more creative.

My hope was that someone here could suggest a solid legal argument against one of the laws. If no one feels qualified to comment, that's okay. I'll just take my toys and go home.


hoffmang, thanks. I'll take you up on that.

xenophobe
06-23-2006, 3:49 PM
Hunt v. Lockyer

It's a current case that will be heard later this year, early next year.

There is not much that you mentioned that would be plausible... otherwise it would have already happened.

bwiese
06-23-2006, 3:49 PM
There's not that many gun lawyers in CA... offhand, I know of...

- Chuck Michel (and the sharp Jason Davis who works for him)
- Bruce Colodny
- Don Kilmer

Don Kates and John Machtinger have done some gun work and are under the Trutanich-Michel umbrella, as I recall, but I think they have other areas of practice too. There may be one or two others I can't recall but these are the biggies that cover both state and Federal issues.

Chuck M (along w/Jason) is gonna be pretty busy for the next year. Don Kilmer is working near 100%, apparently, on the Nordyke gunshow appeal, with his family practice and smaller cases using up the rest of his time.

These people are paid workers with a variety of paying clients - some fighting real criminal charges - and are generally booked near-full. So taking a stab at windmills without some NRA backing on issues that are legally 'ripe' for court attention is a 2nd priority.

bwiese
06-23-2006, 3:51 PM
I think it would be fascinating to analyze the second amendment in the context of national open carry and from the perspective of a pro-se merchant marine. :eek:

Yes, there are special privileges written in the constitution for merchant marines. You'd've thought the courts would realize that now, wouldn't they? :)

hoffmang
06-23-2006, 3:57 PM
Bill,

I would generally concur but on commerce clause issues, CA Gun lawyers aren't the experts. That said, one would still want to talk to Mr. Michel or Mr. Kilmer for example.

DSA_FAL
06-23-2006, 3:59 PM
I have a "friend" that might be willing to fund a suit to get rid of one bad gun law in CA. Yes, this thread ignores one of the best ways to help us...CA gun rights proposition.

If any of you have some real advice, please speak up. If for some reason, you don't think some of this should be discussed in public, let me know.

Does this suit have to go to CA court or could/should we involve a Federal court from the beginning?

Cost of first court? 1st appeal? 2nd appeal? etc.?

Should an individual file? Create a CA corp? Give money to a gun group specifically for this suit?

Which attorney is willing & able to do this. So CA is preferred.

I've intentionally left out suits based on the 2nd & 14 Ammendments.

There was a thread somewhat similar to this a few months ago, but it was mainly about the gun rights prop. I'd like to keep this one focused.


There are all kinds of CA laws on the books. Which one is both offensive to us and possible to change?

1 gun per month...violation of interstate commerce? Is there any other product that is regulated in this way?

Magazine disconnect...safety violation? 1) You can't defend yourself if you can't shoot someone while doing a mag change with a round in the chamber. 2) You can't dry fire with a dummy round and an open mag well. You must insert a magazine which increases the chance of loading a real round sometime during your dry fire exercise.

SB50...there were voting irregularities in the committee process. Other people voted for absent senate/assembly members. http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=100457&highlight=ghost+voting

SB23...another approach this time? Or, at least fight the section that prohibits inheritance? Almost any other heirloom can be passed down to your heirs. Why not guns?

Close the Hollywood loopholes...There are exceptions for Hollywood to buy multiple HGs at one time. I'm sure there are others.

Safety test/approved HG...? CA cars are different, so a unique approach might be needed.

10 round magazine..?

10 day waiting period..? Not needed anymore to eliminate felons from buying. Only possible reason is to delay hot-heads from buying. However, no other item in CA is restricted. You can buy a cheap car from a private party ("the car show loophole") and immediately go run over some kids.

Other laws?

File an overall attack based on the CA Constitution..? It says: 1) the US BOR is the baseline, 2) Each law must apply egually to all citizens. I don't think this would get very far, but it's always possible.

Useful comments?

If you decide to play in the big boys world of law then you should learn to spell legal.

VeryCoolCat
06-23-2006, 4:06 PM
Well obviously 1-3 people working on a bill can make msitakes even when they are experts on it.

Though if we wrote up a bill publicly on the forum, I bet it would have less mistakes than lockyer and his crew have come up with.


Calguns v. Lockyer or we can just use one of our veteran more knowledgable members to file. Weise v. Lockyer :D

WeThePeople
06-23-2006, 4:48 PM
If you decide to play in the big boys world of law then you should learn to spell legal.

Thanks. Just my lame attempt at humor.

However, your "boys" should have been "boys'", since it is a plural possessive noun.


Everyone else, thanks for the advice. I assume you'll charge your usual rates.

Bacon
06-23-2006, 4:49 PM
Yes, there are special privileges written in the constitution for merchant marines. You'd've thought the courts would realize that now, wouldn't they? :)

I first went to sea in 1969 & have never heard of any gun laws regarding Merchant Seaman. Would like to know anything on this subject.

The typical courts in the US know almost nothing about federal laws pertaining to Merchant Seamen. These laws usually deal in debts, taxes & contraband. You would have to find an Admiralty lawyer to get informed opinion. Those guys are pretty rare. They operate in a niche area and usually go after injury cases. Anybody here been in front of a Coast Guard Judge?

PanzerAce
06-23-2006, 8:51 PM
Yes, there are special privileges written in the constitution for merchant marines. You'd've thought the courts would realize that now, wouldn't they? :)

do tell.

(wow, first time Ive hit the 10 char limit in a while)

tenpercentfirearms
06-23-2006, 9:22 PM
What is the point of this thread?

bwiese
06-24-2006, 11:00 AM
I first went to sea in 1969 & have never heard of any gun laws regarding Merchant Seaman. Would like to know anything on this subject.

The typical courts in the US know almost nothing about federal laws pertaining to Merchant Seamen. These laws usually deal in debts, taxes & contraband. You would have to find an Admiralty lawyer to get informed opinion. Those guys are pretty rare. They operate in a niche area and usually go after injury cases. Anybody here been in front of a Coast Guard Judge?

Ah, sorry, guess you didn't get the joke....

About 3 weeks ago there was a poor guy here (Don Hambrich????) that wanted support in his (vain) pro se attempt to make forward progress on the 2nd Amend. front. Somehow he felt that merchant seamen had some special right of open carry - when rational folks advised him of problems/unsuitability, he accused them (us) of being antigun.

No, there are no special privileges accorded merchant seamen in the 2nd Amend. area...

Bacon
06-24-2006, 11:05 AM
Thanks for clarifying Bill. Thought it sounded strange.

glen avon
06-24-2006, 4:55 PM
the idea was that merchant seamen might be pressed into national defense on the high seas; thus by arguing "national open carry" we would all get assault weapons again.

no lie, that's about how it went. so he was asking for money to support his pro se lawsuit. apparently he has been to a series of forums, making his case, getting no love, then being booted or run off or ignored. then, on to another forum....

and heeeeeeeeere's Donny: http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=34752

WeThePeople
06-24-2006, 4:58 PM
Hunt v. Lockyer

It's a current case that will be heard later this year, early next year.

There is not much that you mentioned that would be plausible... otherwise it would have already happened.

Xeno, I'm not sure you're right about "would have already happened". As was mentioned, the good lawyers are busy keeping people out of jail. The NRA looks for the big easy win, such as in San Francisco. I haven't heard about cases involving what I mentioned.

As I said in another post, the lawyer known as "CM" said in 2000 that the NRA was going to first attack SB23, then the "one HG per month" law. Neither case happened.

I'm surprised at the lack of creativity and activity that we show with respect to gun rights. Even small wins are still wins.

adamsreeftank
06-24-2006, 11:02 PM
If this is a serious effort and you or someone you know is willing to invest the time and money, they I say good luck to you. If you manage to overturn the assault weapons laws, then thanks in advance.

PanzerAce
06-24-2006, 11:46 PM
the idea was that merchant seamen might be pressed into national defense on the high seas; thus by arguing "national open carry" we would all get assault weapons again.

no lie, that's about how it went. so he was asking for money to support his pro se lawsuit. apparently he has been to a series of forums, making his case, getting no love, then being booted or run off or ignored. then, on to another forum....

and heeeeeeeeere's Donny: http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=34752


I have to say, that is probalby the funniest thing I have ever read on CGN.

Oh, and isnt the definition of insanity trying the same thing over and over and expecting a different result?

glen avon
06-25-2006, 9:41 AM
ya, I reread it and it was pretty funny.

bwiese
06-25-2006, 11:10 AM
As I said in another post, the lawyer known as "CM" said in 2000 that the NRA was going to first attack SB23, then the "one HG per month" law. Neither case happened.



You can't just randomly sue over laws you don't like. You usually need a person that's been busted for some relevant charge so he has 'standing' to challenge one or more aspects.

Hunt and Harrott are rare cases where the named parties ain't in jail.

Actually the OLL situation may generate interesting situations leading to challenges (or in support of Hunt) of SB23 - something that was just in stasis or a holding pattern pre-OLL.

hoffmang
06-25-2006, 5:44 PM
My guess is that CM = Chuck Michel. Chuck is lead counsel on the DA v. DOJ case against SB23 - Hunt v. California - known colloqually as Hunt v. Lockyer.

That case is scheduled for trial in early 2007. Myself and another Calguns poster are attempting to get a lot more information for everyone here. More news on that part shortly.

WeThePeople
06-26-2006, 12:12 PM
You can't just randomly sue over laws you don't like. You usually need a person that's been busted for some relevant charge so he has 'standing' to challenge one or more aspects.

Hunt and Harrott are rare cases where the named parties ain't in jail.

Actually the OLL situation may generate interesting situations leading to challenges (or in support of Hunt) of SB23 - something that was just in stasis or a holding pattern pre-OLL.

Bill, isn't "standing" easy to get for 1 HG/month and the 10 day waiting period? Buy a HG and ask to get it right away or try to buy another within a month. In both cases, the FFl will tell you to "bugger off". No jail time is risked.

However, we still need a compelling legal (yes, that's spelled l...e...g...a...l) argument. I was hoping someone could come up with one.


Bill, BTW, did I mention that my neighbor bought a Howitzer back in 1999 and is wondering if he should have registered it as an AW? What do you think, Father Bill? ;)

For those humor-impaired JBST types, my neighbor doesn't really have a Howitzer. I think it's really a German 88. ;)

bwiese
06-26-2006, 12:29 PM
Bill, isn't "standing" easy to get for 1 HG/month and the 10 day waiting period? Buy a HG and ask to get it right away or try to buy another within a month. In both cases, the FFl will tell you to "bugger off". No jail time is risked.

No, that's most likely not an appropriate threshold.

More likely it'd have to work like this to even have a chance:
- you are not a 'denied person',
- you fill out all forms truthfully,
- your background check is performed/passed;
- FFL agrees to let you have gun earlier than 10 days and/or
this is your 2nd new gun in under 30 days;
- you get popped for a couple of PC 120xx violations (separate from dealer)...

Now you might just have a chance to have standing for these things...

You generally don't have standing just because you are affected by a law, or if it stops you from doing an activity that would be criminal if you did carry it out: otherwise, everyone would challenge laws they don't like. Generally you have to get popped or lose property, or the law affects some basic right in a grave fashion, etc. first. (In Harrott case, he was suing to get rifles back from a client as payment for services.) "Standing" is a big thing, and sometimes it's a big fight to even get into court to be heard.

WeThePeople
06-26-2006, 1:12 PM
Bill, thanks for the detailed info on "standing".

I'll let you get back to your confessional.