Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > POLITICS, LITIGATION AND ACTIVISM > 2nd Amend. Litigation Updates & Legal Discussion
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

2nd Amend. Litigation Updates & Legal Discussion Discuss California 2A related litigation and legal topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #2201  
Old 01-09-2018, 12:39 PM
phdo's Avatar
phdo phdo is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 3,310
iTrader: 37 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cockedandglocked View Post
Someone forgot to give Librarian the latest firmware update

Sometimes I think Lib is a bot. I don't know how he knows so much information and regurgitate it at will. He's probably a T-1000 and CGN is Skynet. They probably created him to store data and to maintain the site.
__________________
WTB:
2.5" Smith & Wesson Model 19
2.5" Smith & Wesson Model 66
4" Smith & Wesson Model 19
3.5" Smith & Wesson Model 29
Marlin 1894C
Colt Python
Colt Series 70
Sig Sauer P228
HK USP9c
Reply With Quote
  #2202  
Old 01-09-2018, 12:50 PM
taperxz taperxz is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 16,569
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by phdo View Post
Sometimes I think Lib is a bot. I don't know how he knows so much information and regurgitate it at will. He's probably a T-1000 and CGN is Skynet. They probably created him to store data and to maintain the site.
Of course he is. You didn’t think he was human did you?

It’s the CGN software alert monitor/moderator
Reply With Quote
  #2203  
Old 01-09-2018, 1:42 PM
OCRebote78's Avatar
OCRebote78 OCRebote78 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Remudadero
Posts: 308
iTrader: 12 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by phdo View Post
Sometimes I think Lib is a bot. I don't know how he knows so much information and regurgitate it at will. He's probably a T-1000 and CGN is Skynet. They probably created him to store data and to maintain the site.
He/She might need an update here pretty soon based on the last comment.
Reply With Quote
  #2204  
Old 01-10-2018, 7:05 PM
oc16's Avatar
oc16 oc16 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Orange
Posts: 780
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

even if the librarian is a bot he/she does a good job of moderating the forums.
__________________
retreat! we must go comrade we will fight again another day.
Reply With Quote
  #2205  
Old 01-12-2018, 7:59 PM
caliguy93's Avatar
caliguy93 caliguy93 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: North Koreafornia
Posts: 1,082
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

Or maybe we got an Easter egg from the developers about a future soon to be released update. Maybe librarian is right and we will be waiting for SCOTUS to make a decision except that feature was not due to be released under this version of Librarian.

Ya know, kind of like when an early version of the next iPhone is spotted in public
Reply With Quote
  #2206  
Old 01-13-2018, 9:47 AM
Paladin's Avatar
Paladin Paladin is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SFBA
Posts: 8,252
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

While I'm sure Librarian appreciates the appreciation, I'm also sure they enjoy threads staying On Topic even more....
__________________
Never mistake being delusional for being optimistic.

230+ examples of CCWs Saving Lives.

KnifeRights.org/images/KRbanner_468x60-1.gif
Reply With Quote
  #2207  
Old 01-13-2018, 1:46 PM
Solidsnake87's Avatar
Solidsnake87 Solidsnake87 is online now
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Reno, NV
Posts: 4,176
iTrader: 22 / 100%
Default

Its seriously been nearly a year since orals and no decision reached or movement made?
__________________
Quote:
Replying to craigslist for casual encounters is like pokemon with STDs. Gotta catch em all
Quote:
If Hell ever needed a operations manual all it would need is a copy of California's laws
.
Reply With Quote
  #2208  
Old 01-13-2018, 4:05 PM
BCA142's Avatar
BCA142 BCA142 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Northern Corruptifornia
Posts: 650
iTrader: 12 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Solidsnake87 View Post
Its seriously been nearly a year since orals and no decision reached or movement made?
2nd Amendment takes a back seat. Don't worry it's only a constitutional right issue.
__________________
Dec. 15, 1791
"The Right Of The People To Keep And Bear Arms Shall Not Be Infringed" EVER!!!!!

NRA Life Member: Benefactor
Calguns Supporter
CRPA Supporter
Second Amendment Foundation Life Member Defender Club
Reply With Quote
  #2209  
Old 01-14-2018, 7:05 AM
abinsinia's Avatar
abinsinia abinsinia is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 482
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

I hope that the two conservative judges finished the majority opinion a long time ago, then they gave it to the one liberal judge so she can write her dissent, and she's dragging her feat and doesn't know what to write ..
Reply With Quote
  #2210  
Old 01-14-2018, 2:49 PM
TruOil TruOil is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 405
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

10 months really isn't that long for the Ninth. Give it another 6.
Reply With Quote
  #2211  
Old 01-17-2018, 3:50 AM
DaMeMe DaMeMe is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 49
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Solidsnake87 View Post
Its seriously been nearly a year since orals and no decision reached or movement made?
To be honest it's going to take years before we can have that unlawful roster list removed even after the ninth circuit court decision. Think about what happened with the conceal carry case in CA. It has been years since that lawsuit was announced and we've yet to receive a conclusion. Let say we are lucky enough to get the 3 panel judge in the ninth circuit court to say the roster list is unlawful. Politicians in CA would most likely say that decision was wrong which would then lead the ninth circuit court to reevaluate the case but this time with more judges that are most likely say the roster list is lawful. We would then have to take this lawsuit to the supreme court and we all know how long that's going to take especially since the supreme court isn't taking any 2nd amendment related cases right now.

Last edited by DaMeMe; 01-17-2018 at 3:54 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #2212  
Old 01-17-2018, 6:03 AM
Califpatriot Califpatriot is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,102
iTrader: 13 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaMeMe View Post
Think about what happened with the conceal carry case in CA. It has been years since that lawsuit was announced and we've yet to receive a conclusion.
Who's going to break the news to him?
Reply With Quote
  #2213  
Old 01-17-2018, 10:42 AM
champu's Avatar
champu champu is offline
NRA Member, CRPA Member,
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Redondo Beach
Posts: 757
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaMeMe View Post
To be honest it's going to take years before we can have that unlawful roster list removed even after the ninth circuit court decision.
Just to pick at a nit here, there’s a difference between something being unlawful/illegal and something being unconstitutional.

If voters or the legislature pass a ballot measure or a bill respectively, and required procedures were followed, then constitutional or otherwise it isn’t illegal/unlawful.

Now, Cal DOJ maintains/administers the roster and they have adopted regulations for doing so. While it is possible (i.e. not nonsensical) to find something illegal with how they administer the roster (e.g. adding the Armatix to the roster a few years back may have been illegal) that is generally not what is being argued in these court cases.
Reply With Quote
  #2214  
Old 01-17-2018, 11:04 AM
Ubermcoupe's Avatar
Ubermcoupe Ubermcoupe is offline
🇺🇸 Jack-Booted Gov Thug
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: This information has been redacted in accordance with Title 18 U.S. Code § 798
Posts: 14,814
iTrader: 64 / 100%
Blog Entries: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaMeMe View Post
To be honest it's going to take years before we can have that unlawful roster list removed even after the ninth circuit court decision. ...
"years" ... try decades - if at all (i.e. Peruta)

Quote:
Originally Posted by fizux View Post
Peña v. Cid [Cal. DOJ BoF]
Issue: Handgun Roster

...
4/30/2009 - Complaint.

Trial Court: E.D. Cal.
Case No.: 2:09-cv-01185
Docket: http://ia801400.us.archive.org/30/it...44.docket.html

...
__________________
Hauoli Makahiki Hou


-------
Reply With Quote
  #2215  
Old 01-17-2018, 3:08 PM
TruOil TruOil is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 405
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaMeMe View Post
To be honest it's going to take years before we can have that unlawful roster list removed even after the ninth circuit court decision.
The microstamping rule is one thing--since there is no technology that complies with the statutory mandate (and separately that it has nothing to do with safety)--while the rest of the roster requirements another thing all together. The initial requirements--drop safety and reliability--were a consumer safety regulation, and the add-ons (LCI, manual safety and mag disconnect) protections against consumer stupidity ("I didn't know the gun was loaded, and I'm so sorry my friend...") Do you really think any court is going to find that "safety" requirements with which pretty much all manufacturers can comply are "illegal"? Sorry, I really don't see it happen, especially when compared to the regulatory framework that applies to a plethora of consumer products on the market right now.

Last edited by TruOil; 01-17-2018 at 3:10 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #2216  
Old 01-17-2018, 10:33 PM
pistol3 pistol3 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 256
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TruOil View Post
The microstamping rule is one thing--since there is no technology that complies with the statutory mandate (and separately that it has nothing to do with safety)--while the rest of the roster requirements another thing all together. The initial requirements--drop safety and reliability--were a consumer safety regulation, and the add-ons (LCI, manual safety and mag disconnect) protections against consumer stupidity ("I didn't know the gun was loaded, and I'm so sorry my friend...") Do you really think any court is going to find that "safety" requirements with which pretty much all manufacturers can comply are "illegal"? Sorry, I really don't see it happen, especially when compared to the regulatory framework that applies to a plethora of consumer products on the market right now.
I think it would be entirely possible for a court (not the 9th, obviously) to rule that guns in common use for lawful purposes cannot be banned for sale because they do not have a certain safety feature desired by a state government.
Reply With Quote
  #2217  
Old 01-17-2018, 11:48 PM
Saym14 Saym14 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: So Cal
Posts: 7,826
iTrader: 147 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pistol3 View Post
I think it would be entirely possible for a court (not the 9th, obviously) to rule that guns in common use for lawful purposes cannot be banned for sale because they do not have a certain safety feature desired by a state government.
the problem is
Quote:
Originally Posted by pistol3 View Post
I think
the california law makers dont care what you think
Reply With Quote
  #2218  
Old 01-18-2018, 10:41 AM
BAJ475's Avatar
BAJ475 BAJ475 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Butte County, California
Posts: 1,842
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Saym14 View Post
the problem is

the California law makers don't care what you think
And in all but a couple of states there is no roster, so no likelihood of a challenge being raised outside of the 9th.
Reply With Quote
  #2219  
Old 01-18-2018, 1:22 PM
TruOil TruOil is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 405
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BAJ475 View Post
And in all but a couple of states there is no roster, so no likelihood of a challenge being raised outside of the 9th.
Isn't Massachusetts the only other one? No hope there.
Reply With Quote
  #2220  
Old 01-18-2018, 1:53 PM
Drivedabizness's Avatar
Drivedabizness Drivedabizness is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Folsom, CA
Posts: 2,004
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by champu View Post
Just to pick at a nit here, there’s a difference between something being unlawful/illegal and something being unconstitutional.

If voters or the legislature pass a ballot measure or a bill respectively, and required procedures were followed, then constitutional or otherwise it isn’t illegal/unlawful.

Now, Cal DOJ maintains/administers the roster and they have adopted regulations for doing so. While it is possible (i.e. not nonsensical) to find something illegal with how they administer the roster (e.g. adding the Armatix to the roster a few years back may have been illegal) that is generally not what is being argued in these court cases.
While there may be/is a distinction nothing unconstitutional is ever legal.
__________________
Proud CGN Contributor
USMC Pistol Team Alumni - Distinguished Pistol Shot
Owner of multiple Constitutionally protected tools
Reply With Quote
  #2221  
Old 01-18-2018, 8:39 PM
Paladin's Avatar
Paladin Paladin is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SFBA
Posts: 8,252
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Solidsnake87 View Post
Its seriously been nearly a year since orals and no decision reached or movement made?
I won't start getting antsy until Oct 01 rolls around without a decision.

Until then, just relax, enjoy your lives, and let those "wheels of justice" quietly grind away....

__________________
Never mistake being delusional for being optimistic.

230+ examples of CCWs Saving Lives.

KnifeRights.org/images/KRbanner_468x60-1.gif
Reply With Quote
  #2222  
Old 01-20-2018, 1:53 PM
Rastoff's Avatar
Rastoff Rastoff is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: So Cal (Near Edwards AFB)
Posts: 728
iTrader: 11 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paladin View Post
I won't start getting antsy until Oct 01 rolls around without a decision.

Until then, just relax, enjoy your lives, and let those "wheels of justice" quietly grind away....

I think this is one of the great failings of the populace in the 21st century; letting the wheels of justice grind away.

The founding fathers understood the value of a speedy trial to the accused. This is necessary because their life is passing by and we have limited time on this earth. Time is the one commodity that can never be traded and never increases. So, a long trial or wait for a trial is tantamount to being found guilty right away.

The right to a speedy trial doesn't apply to matters of legislation. They always go against us because they go into affect immediately and then take decades to overturn NO MATTER HOW UNCONSTITUTIONAL THEY ARE.

Look at the microstamping issue. We held it off for a few years, but its enactment is a 100% gun ban which is 100% unconstitutional both in the concept of fair trade and the 2A.

No, I don't agree with being patient. It is our right and our duty to show the powers-that-be that we're fed up with their condescending attitude toward our rights. We need to force them to do their jobs. Stop taking vacations every other week and just get it done. I don't know how to do it, but the time for patiently waiting is past.
__________________
Remember, you can post here because they died over there.

www.BlackRiverTraining.com
Reply With Quote
  #2223  
Old 01-20-2018, 2:35 PM
Librarian's Avatar
Librarian Librarian is offline
Administrator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Concord
Posts: 37,442
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Blog Entries: 6
Default

There's no leverage to compel changes.

Judges have a lifetime appointment; I don't see SCOTUS issuing a mandamus, 'get off the dime' order.
__________________
No one will really understand politics until they understand that politicians are not trying to solve our problems. They are trying to solve their own problems - of which getting elected and re-elected are number one and number two. Whatever is number three is far behind.
- Thomas Sowell
I've been saying that for years ...

There is no value at all complaining or analyzing or reading tea leaves to decide what these bills really mean or actually do; any bill with a chance to pass will be bad for gun owners.

The details only count after the Governor signs the bills.

Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs.


Reply With Quote
  #2224  
Old 01-21-2018, 2:23 PM
Rastoff's Avatar
Rastoff Rastoff is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: So Cal (Near Edwards AFB)
Posts: 728
iTrader: 11 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Librarian View Post
There's no leverage to compel changes.
Lots of different kinds of leverage in the world.
__________________
Remember, you can post here because they died over there.

www.BlackRiverTraining.com
Reply With Quote
  #2225  
Old 01-23-2018, 10:28 PM
Nor*Cal Nor*Cal is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 2,499
iTrader: 17 / 100%
Default

Someone just posted in the handgun section that Coonan Inc. announced at Shot Show that they have successfully added microstamping to some new 1911's in accordance with CA law.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s....php?t=1419243
Reply With Quote
  #2226  
Old 01-24-2018, 4:04 AM
Paladin's Avatar
Paladin Paladin is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SFBA
Posts: 8,252
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

This is a civil case, not a criminal case. No one's freedom is at stake, just their liberty to buy the handgun they want.

This is an appeal, not a trial. We're not waiting for jurors to decide about facts, but judges deciding about law/justice.

We're not talking about someone convicted being on death row for decades. It hasn't even been a year since oral arguments.

I didn't say give the judges a blank check, only that I won't get antsy until Oct 01 -- another 8+ months.

But, everyone, please feel free to ignore me and be if that makes you feel better....

As for me: Pena does not directly affect me and I can't directly affect it, so I'll be until Librarian edits the tread title to say the decision has been released.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rastoff View Post
I think this is one of the great failings of the populace in the 21st century; letting the wheels of justice grind away.

The founding fathers understood the value of a speedy trial to the accused. This is necessary because their life is passing by and we have limited time on this earth. Time is the one commodity that can never be traded and never increases. So, a long trial or wait for a trial is tantamount to being found guilty right away.

The right to a speedy trial doesn't apply to matters of legislation. They always go against us because they go into affect immediately and then take decades to overturn NO MATTER HOW UNCONSTITUTIONAL THEY ARE.

Look at the microstamping issue. We held it off for a few years, but its enactment is a 100% gun ban which is 100% unconstitutional both in the concept of fair trade and the 2A.

No, I don't agree with being patient. It is our right and our duty to show the powers-that-be that we're fed up with their condescending attitude toward our rights. We need to force them to do their jobs. Stop taking vacations every other week and just get it done. I don't know how to do it, but the time for patiently waiting is past.
__________________
Never mistake being delusional for being optimistic.

230+ examples of CCWs Saving Lives.

KnifeRights.org/images/KRbanner_468x60-1.gif

Last edited by Paladin; 01-24-2018 at 2:12 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #2227  
Old 01-24-2018, 7:17 AM
AdamVIP AdamVIP is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 339
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

So is the ultimate answer to these that in order to fight them we need to find defendants prosecuted for such items so it is a criminal case instead of a civil one? I realize no one ever wants to be the test case but perhaps speeding up the process may even make better use of donation monies. Legal fees paid for and bonds covered for a year must be cheaper than the current 9 years we are approaching on this case.

Has anyone been prosecuted for a handgun roster violation?
Reply With Quote
  #2228  
Old 01-24-2018, 12:31 PM
Librarian's Avatar
Librarian Librarian is offline
Administrator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Concord
Posts: 37,442
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Blog Entries: 6
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AdamVIP View Post

Has anyone been prosecuted for a handgun roster violation?
Hard to tell -
Quote:
32000.

(a) A person in this state who manufactures or causes to be manufactured, imports into the state for sale, keeps for sale, offers or exposes for sale, gives, or lends an unsafe handgun shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year.
Misdemeanor convictions seldom get appealed.
__________________
No one will really understand politics until they understand that politicians are not trying to solve our problems. They are trying to solve their own problems - of which getting elected and re-elected are number one and number two. Whatever is number three is far behind.
- Thomas Sowell
I've been saying that for years ...

There is no value at all complaining or analyzing or reading tea leaves to decide what these bills really mean or actually do; any bill with a chance to pass will be bad for gun owners.

The details only count after the Governor signs the bills.

Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs.


Reply With Quote
  #2229  
Old 01-26-2018, 2:43 PM
p7m8jg's Avatar
p7m8jg p7m8jg is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Modesto
Posts: 1,501
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Librarian View Post
Hard to tell - Misdemeanor convictions seldom get appealed.
Very true, and when they do get appealed, it first goes to an appellate division of the exact same Superior Court in the County where the conviction occurred, not a state appellate court. Nobody spends the $$$ to go further, typically.
Reply With Quote
  #2230  
Old 01-27-2018, 7:45 PM
Ultralight's Avatar
Ultralight Ultralight is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Los Angeles, Kalifornia
Posts: 64
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default Proposition to remove the roster

Would it be possible to gather signatures for a proposition to simply ban the roster? Similar to the current movement to repeal the recent gas tax increases?
Then it could get on the ballot for voters to decide.
__________________
“The Framers made a clear choice: They reserved to all Americans the right to bear arms for self-defense. I do not think we should stand by idly while a State denies its citizens that right.” – Justice Clarence Thomas

Last edited by Ultralight; 01-27-2018 at 7:47 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #2231  
Old 01-27-2018, 8:02 PM
CaliforniaLiberal's Avatar
CaliforniaLiberal CaliforniaLiberal is offline
#1 Bull Goose Loony
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 4,595
iTrader: 23 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultralight View Post
Would it be possible to gather signatures for a proposition to simply ban the roster? Similar to the current movement to repeal the recent gas tax increases?

You are not the first to suggest countering CA Legislature gun control laws with the Proposition process. This has been discussed fairly regularly on CalGuns for the 10 years I have been here.

The consensus seems to be that this is a great idea if it passes the voters but a lousy idea if it fails. A failure is an endorsement of the Anti-Second Amendment position by the voters.

It seems that CA voters are inclined in favor of Gun Control.

Also you would need, wise CalGuns heads say, a couple of million bucks to get an effective signature gathering campaign started, more money to finish it, and more money still to run advertising in support of the Gun Rights Proposition.

Money is the fuel for the political process.


I searched Calguns Custom Search:
https://cse.google.com/cse/home?cx=0...78:pzxbzjzh1zk
with the following
"gather signatures for propositions"
and got lots of hits.

Here's a thread from 2013 for example:
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/a.../t-821797.html
__________________
Better Way to Search CalGuns - https://www.google.com/cse/home?cx=0...78:pzxbzjzh1zk
CA Bill Search - http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/fa...chClient.xhtml
C D Michel, Good Info CA Gun Law, New CA Legislation - http://www.calgunlaws.com
California Rifle and Pistol Association - http://crpa.org/membership/
Sacramento County Sheriff Concealed Carry Info - https://www.sacsheriff.com/Pages/Org.../SIIB/CCW.aspx
Second Amendment Foundation - http://www.saf.org
Reply With Quote
  #2232  
Old 01-27-2018, 8:19 PM
abinsinia's Avatar
abinsinia abinsinia is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 482
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

I think an initiative could work if you took the stance that the roster is limiting because people can't find a gun to fit their hand, or recoil sensitivity. Also if you keep the roster, but allow off roster gun sales, except the FFL has to explain to the person buying an off roster gun that the safety features aren't part of the gun. It seems like it would be common sense to people.
Reply With Quote
  #2233  
Old 01-27-2018, 8:31 PM
Ultralight's Avatar
Ultralight Ultralight is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Los Angeles, Kalifornia
Posts: 64
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaliforniaLiberal View Post

The consensus seems to be that this is a great idea if it passes the voters but a lousy idea if it fails. A failure is an endorsement of the Anti-Second Amendment position by the voters.

It seems that CA voters are inclined in favor of Gun Control.

Also you would need, wise CalGuns heads say, a couple of million bucks to get an effective signature gathering campaign started, more money to finish it, and more money still to run advertising in support of the Gun Rights Proposition.

Money is the fuel for the political process.

True.
Having millions of people like my mother-in-law (anti-2nd Amendment) voting on this matter would probably be a bad thing.

__________________
“The Framers made a clear choice: They reserved to all Americans the right to bear arms for self-defense. I do not think we should stand by idly while a State denies its citizens that right.” – Justice Clarence Thomas
Reply With Quote
  #2234  
Old 01-27-2018, 9:39 PM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
I'm with stupid ☝️
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 14,737
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by abinsinia View Post
It seems like it would be common sense to people.
And therein lies the problem. Not only do most voters lack common sense, but most of them don't even understand what the term means. Their propaganda regularly attaches the phrase to just about everything that is, in fact, not common sense at all.

See this 2007 huffpo Microstamping article that says California needs "to take a common-sense step toward ending gun violence and illegal gun trafficking." Yes, they really think that microstamping is common sense... Because they don't think.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-...a_b_61407.html

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
__________________


Reply With Quote
  #2235  
Old 01-27-2018, 9:48 PM
Paladin's Avatar
Paladin Paladin is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SFBA
Posts: 8,252
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

56 pages of posts...

Does anyone remember the composition of the panel hearing this? Dem:Repub nominated judges? Our odds of winning/losing?
__________________
Never mistake being delusional for being optimistic.

230+ examples of CCWs Saving Lives.

KnifeRights.org/images/KRbanner_468x60-1.gif
Reply With Quote
  #2236  
Old 01-27-2018, 10:24 PM
Librarian's Avatar
Librarian Librarian is offline
Administrator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Concord
Posts: 37,442
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Blog Entries: 6
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paladin View Post
56 pages of posts...

Does anyone remember the composition of the panel hearing this? Dem:Repub nominated judges? Our odds of winning/losing?
https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/media/v...vid=0000011228


Case Panel:
WALLACE (Nixon), McKEOWN (Clinton), BYBEE (Bush)
__________________
No one will really understand politics until they understand that politicians are not trying to solve our problems. They are trying to solve their own problems - of which getting elected and re-elected are number one and number two. Whatever is number three is far behind.
- Thomas Sowell
I've been saying that for years ...

There is no value at all complaining or analyzing or reading tea leaves to decide what these bills really mean or actually do; any bill with a chance to pass will be bad for gun owners.

The details only count after the Governor signs the bills.

Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs.


Reply With Quote
  #2237  
Old 01-28-2018, 5:55 AM
abinsinia's Avatar
abinsinia abinsinia is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 482
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cockedandglocked View Post
And therein lies the problem. Not only do most voters lack common sense, but most of them don't even understand what the term means. Their propaganda regularly attaches the phrase to just about everything that is, in fact, not common sense at all.

See this 2007 huffpo Microstamping article that says California needs "to take a common-sense step toward ending gun violence and illegal gun trafficking." Yes, they really think that microstamping is common sense... Because they don't think.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-...a_b_61407.html
We're the only ones that read HuffPo, your idea of "common sense" is more of a caricature than anything real. The vast majority of people don't follow these issue closely at all. Most people (even in California) do think that U.S. citizens should be able to own guns, if the list is so limited that you can't get one I think people might be willing to change the law.
Reply With Quote
  #2238  
Old 01-28-2018, 6:55 AM
Paladin's Avatar
Paladin Paladin is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SFBA
Posts: 8,252
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Librarian View Post
https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/media/v...vid=0000011228


Case Panel:
WALLACE (Nixon), McKEOWN (Clinton), BYBEE (Bush)
Thanks, Librarian.

Hmm. Some of Nixon's were good, some bad. It wasn't until Bork that the Right realized how the Left had weaponized the federal courts.

Bybee was a GWB appointee, so that's one likely anti (McKeown) and one likely pro (Bybee), so I won't even guess if we'll win or not with Wallace.

ETA: Watched (rewatched?) the oral arguments. I am more optimistic. From 30:00 onward is the meat. Wallace cuts to the core re. microstamping not being a safety per se issue, but an aid to LE investigators. So I'm putting him on our side.

Depending upon how the court chooses to approach the case (42:25 and following), I could see microstamping shot down (not consumer safety of gun, but public safety of aiding LE), CLI upheld (via "evolving" standards of safety), but not sure which way they (the majority?) will go on MDM.

__________________
Never mistake being delusional for being optimistic.

230+ examples of CCWs Saving Lives.

KnifeRights.org/images/KRbanner_468x60-1.gif

Last edited by Paladin; 01-28-2018 at 9:04 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #2239  
Old 01-28-2018, 8:59 AM
champu's Avatar
champu champu is offline
NRA Member, CRPA Member,
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Redondo Beach
Posts: 757
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cockedandglocked View Post
And therein lies the problem. Not only do most voters lack common sense, but most of them don't even understand what the term means. Their propaganda regularly attaches the phrase to just about everything that is, in fact, not common sense at all.
All “common-sense” means today is “something I wish everyone agreed with me about” and/or “something I want to cast those who don’t agree with me in a negative light over.” It should not be mistaken for a coherent nor thoughtful argument.

Even if it weren’t a hollowed-out term, it’s not inherently positive. After all, there’s a reason the word “counterintuitive” exists.
Reply With Quote
  #2240  
Old 01-28-2018, 11:13 AM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
I'm with stupid ☝️
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 14,737
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by champu View Post
All “common-sense” means today is “something I wish everyone agreed with me about” and/or “something I want to cast those who don’t agree with me in a negative light over.” It should not be mistaken for a coherent nor thoughtful argument.

Even if it weren’t a hollowed-out term, it’s not inherently positive. After all, there’s a reason the word “counterintuitive” exists.
It's indeed a common propaganda technique, to subtly make those opposed to an idea sound evil and/or ignorant. The more subtle, the better. Saying a bill is common sense, is a subtle way of calling opponents imbeciles. Black Lives Matter is another excellent example of this - it makes anyone who doesn't support their cause sound like they think black lives don't matter, when in fact that is largely not the case. The mistake that most of us make, is in underestimating the creativity of our opponents. They know exactly what to say to get people riled up against what we believe in, and frankly they've been better at it than us for a long time, which is why we are where we are.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
__________________


Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 2:41 PM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2018, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
Calguns.net and The Calguns Foundation have no affiliation and are in no way related to each other.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.