PDA

View Full Version : OLLs and CA Spirit of the Law


1911su16b870
11-27-2007, 8:14 PM
I have heard that all law in CA has to be interpreted in spirit and not to the letter. That would mean all the gun ban laws (Roberti Roos/Kasler List, 50bmg etc)written are invalid, due to them being enforced to the letter and not the spirit. But then again maybe BOF/DOJ is trying to enforce the spirit and not the letter, and hence all the confusion-i.e. needing case law etc? Would someone please explain why gun laws are interpreted to the letter and not the spirit? :confused:

Mssr. Eleganté
11-27-2007, 8:42 PM
All I can say on this is there is no way to enforce the spirit of the California A/W laws because nobody can ever know what the sprit of the California A/W laws are.

California A/W laws try to ban all firearms that the authors of the laws found scarier than they found most other kinds of guns.

There is no way for the average person to know what kinds of guns a lawmaker finds scary unless the lawmaker makes a list of those guns or writes out a very detailed description of a particular style of gun.

If your kid was really scared of ghosts, witches and dinosaurs, but he thought vampires, dragons and gansta-rappers were cool, how could you decide what the "spirit" of your kid's fear was?

hoffmang
11-27-2007, 8:48 PM
Spirit Schmirit. When the Supreme Court of California speaks, the law listens:

http://web.mit.edu/~joncox/www/docs/harrott_v_kings.shtml

-Gene

DedEye
11-27-2007, 8:50 PM
Spirit Schmirit. When the Supreme Court of California speaks, the law listens:

http://web.mit.edu/~joncox/www/docs/harrott_v_kings.shtml

-Gene

Exactly. I was explaining CA AW laws to an ADA tonight and after explaining that you could own guns that were identical but not banned by names (OLLs), he suggested that the solution was to update the list quarterly. I politely explained that the CA Supreme Court disagreed with his opinion.

hoffmang
11-27-2007, 9:12 PM
Exactly. I was explaining CA AW laws to an ADA tonight and after explaining that you could own guns that were identical but not banned by names (OLLs), he suggested that the solution was to update the list quarterly. I politely explained that the CA Supreme Court disagreed with his opinion.

Well, he was kind of right. The CA Supremes told DOJ to update the list as often as they'd like and they never took the advice...

-Gene

RRangel
11-27-2007, 9:14 PM
Exactly. I was explaining CA AW laws to an ADA tonight and after explaining that you could own guns that were identical but not banned by names (OLLs), he suggested that the solution was to update the list quarterly. I politely explained that the CA Supreme Court disagreed with his opinion.

Well, the DOJ could have promulgated, but that is a by gone since legislation was passed. They could have updated the list every quarter if they so wanted. They didn't want to give us new "assault weapons"

Piper
11-27-2007, 9:16 PM
As naive as it may sound, the "spirit" of the law should be to keep dangerous weapons out of the hands of violent criminals. However, I'm somewhat ignorant of exactly what our political elitists consider the spirit of the law. It's just a guess, but like children they consider mere citizens to be incapable of handling that kind of tremendous responsibility. I suppose I could cite examples like Stallone, Mac, Feinstein et al. as examples of elitists that consider themselves above the rest of us, but I think that would be redundant. Anyway, that's my $0.02 worth.

artherd
11-27-2007, 10:10 PM
Exactly. I was explaining CA AW laws to an ADA tonight and after explaining that you could own guns that were identical but not banned by names (OLLs), he suggested that the solution was to update the list quarterly. I politely explained that the CA Supreme Court disagreed with his opinion.

Actually, the Supreme Court decided exactly that DOJ could indeed just update the list whenever they liked.

DOJ found the idea of 'giving us new assault weapons' so distasteful, they ordered the legislature to remove that option from codified law :rolleyes:

Muzz
11-27-2007, 10:44 PM
The "spirit" of the Constitution says "keep your !@#$%^ hands off my guns" but they don't seem to mind offending that.