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
  #641  
Old 11-28-2017, 12:27 PM
malfunction's Avatar
malfunction malfunction is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: low crawling towards the state line...
Posts: 355
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by El Viajero View Post
Any updates on the magazine ban? I am possibly moving to California for grad school and want to buy a few things before I move. I just wonder if I should buy extra magazines or not.
Sure, bring all the magazines you want. Provided none of them hold more than ten rounds.

Unless you owned them in California before 2000 you are out of luck. LCMs have been illegal to buy, sell, import, offer for sale, transfer etc since then and the injunction doesn't change that.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by kcbrown View Post
What we have in practice is a legal system, not a justice system.
Reply With Quote
  #642  
Old 11-30-2017, 9:06 AM
Junkie's Avatar
Junkie Junkie is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 4,765
iTrader: 21 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by El Viajero View Post
Any updates on the magazine ban? I am possibly moving to California for grad school and want to buy a few things before I move. I just wonder if I should buy extra magazines or not.
You're out of luck, and have been for quite a while.

What you should consider buying are handguns that don't meet the AW definition (basically, conventional handguns without threaded barrels) that aren't on the roster: Gen5 Glock, VP9, P320, etc.
__________________
I will never buy another Spikes Tactical item, as I have a 5.45 marked barrel from them with a 5.56 bore that keyholed at 25 yards, and they wouldn't replace it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CSACANNONEER View Post
A real live woman is more expensive than a fleshlight. Which would you rather have?
Reply With Quote
  #643  
Old 12-01-2017, 4:17 PM
Solidsnake87's Avatar
Solidsnake87 Solidsnake87 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 4,128
iTrader: 22 / 100%
Default

Have any new sb 1446 regs been posted or finalized since the last ones were withdrawn?

I'd like to know if the state has established final language on 10/30 construction. Ive searched but found nothing.
__________________
Quote:
Replying to craigslist for casual encounters is like pokemon with STDs. Gotta catch em all
Reply With Quote
  #644  
Old 12-05-2017, 8:34 PM
Rami22's Avatar
Rami22 Rami22 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Orange County
Posts: 135
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Been reading up on these threads. So it looks like we are still “safe” with LCM for now. I saw a post form earlier and it caught my attention. So would a LCM with something like a Taran mag plate be considered somewhat safe to use?
Reply With Quote
  #645  
Old 12-05-2017, 8:51 PM
AR15fan's Avatar
AR15fan AR15fan is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 153
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rami22 View Post
Been reading up on these threads. So it looks like we are still “safe” with LCM for now. I saw a post form earlier and it caught my attention. So would a LCM with something like a Taran mag plate be considered somewhat safe to use?
Assuming you legally possessed the hi-cap magazine prior to 2000, you can use, and do whatever you want to them. Right now.
Reply With Quote
  #646  
Old 12-06-2017, 8:47 PM
Rami22's Avatar
Rami22 Rami22 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Orange County
Posts: 135
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AR15fan View Post
Assuming you legally possessed the hi-cap magazine prior to 2000, you can use, and do whatever you want to them. Right now.
Got it, thanks for clearing that up. I was just unsure if the addition of a mag plate would change everything up.
Reply With Quote
  #647  
Old 12-07-2017, 8:22 AM
Mesa Defense's Avatar
Mesa Defense Mesa Defense is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,109
iTrader: 13 / 100%
Default

“I'd like to know if the state has established final language on 10/30 construction. Ive searched but found nothing”

+1...
Reply With Quote
  #648  
Old 12-28-2017, 4:38 PM
GW's Avatar
GW GW is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 14,496
iTrader: 24 / 100%
Default

Any new developments?
__________________
NRA Benefactor Member
Reply With Quote
  #649  
Old 12-28-2017, 5:13 PM
chris's Avatar
chris chris is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: In Texas for now
Posts: 18,251
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GW View Post
Any new developments?
stuff like this moves like pond water. If the AG is going to challenge it and our AG is as anti gun and the rest of them. He's gonna have to have his ducks in a row. If he loses it's game over for the ban if I'm correct here?

If he wins a very bad precedent will be set in this state for further legalized taking.
__________________
http://govnews.ca.gov/gov39mail/mail.php

Quote:
Public Safety Chairman Reggie Jones Sawyer, D-Los Angeles said, “This is California; we don’t pay too much attention to the Constitution,”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6Dj8tdSC1A
contact the governor
https://govnews.ca.gov/gov39mail/mail.php
In Memory of Spc Torres May 5th 2006 al-Hillah, Iraq. I will miss you my friend.
When Hell is full the dead will walk the Earth. (Dawn of the Dead)
NRA Life Member.
Reply With Quote
  #650  
Old 12-29-2017, 10:18 PM
pistol3 pistol3 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 243
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chris View Post
stuff like this moves like pond water. If the AG is going to challenge it and our AG is as anti gun and the rest of them. He's gonna have to have his ducks in a row. If he loses it's game over for the ban if I'm correct here?

If he wins a very bad precedent will be set in this state for further legalized taking.
I'm not sure it is game over if they lose at the 9th. As I understand it, they are only appealing the injunction issued by the district court, not the validity of the actual law. My assumption with all CA anti-gun laws is that there is an implicit guarantee by the 9th Circuit that they will allow them to stand by any means necessary. Even if you beat the antis at a 3 judge panel at the 9th, they will take the case en banc and overrule the 3 judge panel to make sure the anti-gun law is declared constitutional.
Reply With Quote
  #651  
Old 12-30-2017, 5:52 PM
chris's Avatar
chris chris is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: In Texas for now
Posts: 18,251
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pistol3 View Post
I'm not sure it is game over if they lose at the 9th. As I understand it, they are only appealing the injunction issued by the district court, not the validity of the actual law. My assumption with all CA anti-gun laws is that there is an implicit guarantee by the 9th Circuit that they will allow them to stand by any means necessary. Even if you beat the antis at a 3 judge panel at the 9th, they will take the case en banc and overrule the 3 judge panel to make sure the anti-gun law is declared constitutional.
of course he's appealing the injunction that way the law will be in force and we will be once again be forced to surrender or destroy our property. If the injunction is removed IMO it will set a very bad precedent for the state to "take" other property they deem undesirable in the state to posses. Let your imagination go with that one.
__________________
http://govnews.ca.gov/gov39mail/mail.php

Quote:
Public Safety Chairman Reggie Jones Sawyer, D-Los Angeles said, “This is California; we don’t pay too much attention to the Constitution,”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6Dj8tdSC1A
contact the governor
https://govnews.ca.gov/gov39mail/mail.php
In Memory of Spc Torres May 5th 2006 al-Hillah, Iraq. I will miss you my friend.
When Hell is full the dead will walk the Earth. (Dawn of the Dead)
NRA Life Member.
Reply With Quote
  #652  
Old 01-02-2018, 10:22 PM
Erion929's Avatar
Erion929 Erion929 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: So. Orange County, CA.
Posts: 3,083
iTrader: 55 / 100%
Default

What do the pre-ban standard cap mags look like?

How are they recognized as "pre-2000"....were they manufacturer date-stamped back then? Were they all metal? Or just like a typical present-day Magpul-with-a-block-inside?

Pardon the ignorance....didn't get into ARs til after that.


-
__________________
Join Active Junky for online rebates....$10 to both you and I.
https://www.activejunky.com/invite/238017
Reply With Quote
  #653  
Old 01-02-2018, 11:16 PM
Librarian's Avatar
Librarian Librarian is offline
Super Moderator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Concord
Posts: 36,524
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Blog Entries: 6
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Erion929 View Post
What do the pre-ban standard cap mags look like?

How are they recognized as "pre-2000"....were they manufacturer date-stamped back then? Were they all metal? Or just like a typical present-day Magpul-with-a-block-inside?

Pardon the ignorance....didn't get into ARs til after that.


-
In most cases, pre-2000 mags are indistinguishable from post-2000 mags, except where new mags were designed and manufactured for post-2000 guns.

And, for mags in CA post-2000, it was legal to repair those mags with post-2000 parts, even if marked with a post-2000 date or code - so it's possible a pre-2000 mag might have the appearance of a post-2000 mag of the same type.

If the mag ban itself is upheld, such distinctions will be moot.
__________________
[Carol Ann voice]The Legislature is baaa-ack .... [/Carol Ann voice]

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
  #654  
Old 01-07-2018, 7:06 AM
wolfwood's Avatar
wolfwood wolfwood is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: San Diego
Posts: 871
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

http://michellawyers.com/wp-content/...pellees_55.pdf

answering brief filed
Reply With Quote
  #655  
Old 01-07-2018, 12:21 PM
ARFrog's Avatar
ARFrog ARFrog is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Northern Calif - East Bay area
Posts: 110
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

An interesting read. I appreciate a legal document that is well ordered, cogent and has a "written voice" that is reasonably understandable by the general citizenry and hopefully the Court.

Best wishes for success both in the short and long run on this suit!
Reply With Quote
  #656  
Old 01-08-2018, 1:47 PM
CCWFacts CCWFacts is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 5,552
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

This case seeks to overturn both the confiscation, and the underlying ban on acquiring, right? I like how the brief is written and let's hope for success!
__________________
I will spit whenever I hear the word Libertarian from now on.

In the 2016 election, Libertarian voters threw the swing states of Nevada, Colorado, New Mexico, Minnesota, New Hampshire, and Maine to Hillary, for a total of 38 electoral college votes. Hillary would have created a permanent a permanent entitlement class and permanent Democratic control over the US.
Reply With Quote
  #657  
Old 01-08-2018, 3:04 PM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Not a mod or lawyer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 12,331
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CCWFacts View Post
This case seeks to overturn both the confiscation, and the underlying ban on acquiring, right? I like how the brief is written and let's hope for success!
Here's what the original complaint says:

Quote:
Plaintiffs pray that the Court:
1. Enter a declaratory judgment under 28 U.S.C. § 2201 that California Penal Code section 32310 is unconstitutional on its face or, alternatively, to the extent its prohibitions apply to law-abiding adults seeking to acquire, use, or possess firearm magazines that are in common use by the American public for lawful purposes, because such unlawfully infringes on the right of the People to keep and bear arms in violation of the Second and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, unconstitutionally takes property without compensation in violation of the Takings Clause, and arbitrarily deprives Plaintiffs of protected property interests under the Due Process Clause.
2. Issue an injunction enjoining Defendants and their officers, agents, and employees from enforcing California Penal Code section 32310 in its entirety, or, alternatively, to the extent such can be segregated from the rest of the statute, any provision of section 32310 that prohibits the acquiring, using, or possessing of firearm magazines that are in common use by the American public for lawful purposes;
3. Award remedies available under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and all reasonable attorneys’ fees, costs, and expenses under 42 U.S.C. § 1988, or any other applicable law; and
4. Grant any such other and further relief as the Court may deem proper.
Note that, while the complaint prayed for relief in the form of an injunction against the laws prohibiting BOTH possession AND acquisition, the injunction that we got didn't cover both. However, the final judgment might.

Here was the (relevant portion of the) injunction text:

Quote:
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Defendant Attorney General Xavier Becerra, and his officers, agents, servants,employees, and attorneys, and those persons in active concert or participation with him,and those duly sworn state peace officers and federal law enforcement officers who gain knowledge of this injunction order or know of the existence of this injunction order, are enjoined from implementing or enforcing California Penal Code sections 32310 (c) &(d), as enacted by proposition 63, or from otherwise requiring persons to dispossess themselves of magazines able to hold more than 10 rounds lawfully acquired and possessed.

2. Defendant Becerra shall provide, by personal service or otherwise, actual notice of this order to all law enforcement personnel who are responsible for implementing or enforcing the enjoined statute. The government shall file a declaration establishing proof of such notice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Last edited by cockedandglocked; 01-08-2018 at 3:16 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #658  
Old 01-08-2018, 3:44 PM
CCWFacts CCWFacts is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 5,552
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cockedandglocked View Post
Note that, while the complaint prayed for relief in the form of an injunction against the laws prohibiting BOTH possession AND acquisition, the injunction that we got didn't cover both.
Right, makes sense. The law to dispose of them causing more immediate harm to the owners than the part of the law that blocks acquiring them causes to would-be owners.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cockedandglocked View Post
However, the final judgment might.
Cool! but I'm pretty sure that we need one more Trump appointed justice on SCOTUS to have a serious hope of winning that.

If I'm reading the page right there are 5 current vacancies in the 9th court of appeals. If Trump would get those filled quickly that might also help us quite a lot here in California.
__________________
I will spit whenever I hear the word Libertarian from now on.

In the 2016 election, Libertarian voters threw the swing states of Nevada, Colorado, New Mexico, Minnesota, New Hampshire, and Maine to Hillary, for a total of 38 electoral college votes. Hillary would have created a permanent a permanent entitlement class and permanent Democratic control over the US.
Reply With Quote
  #659  
Old 01-08-2018, 4:49 PM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Not a mod or lawyer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 12,331
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CCWFacts View Post
Right, makes sense. The law to dispose of them causing more immediate harm to the owners than the part of the law that blocks acquiring them causes to would-be owners.



Cool! but I'm pretty sure that we need one more Trump appointed justice on SCOTUS to have a serious hope of winning that.

If I'm reading the page right there are 5 current vacancies in the 9th court of appeals. If Trump would get those filled quickly that might also help us quite a lot here in California.
I'm getting way too far ahead of myself here, but there's always the tiny chance that we win a 3-judge panel in the 9th, and the case doesn't get en banc, nor heard by scotus - which would also be a win. We *almost* had that happen with peruta, except that one actually did get en banc, but historically only about 5% of circuit courts of appeals cases get heard en banc.

But, let's not dive too far down that rabbit hole just yet, we haven't even finished in the lower courts yet
Reply With Quote
  #660  
Old 01-08-2018, 7:05 PM
aBrowningfan aBrowningfan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 546
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cockedandglocked View Post
Note that, while the complaint prayed for relief in the form of an injunction against the laws prohibiting BOTH possession AND acquisition, the injunction that we got didn't cover both. However, the final judgment might.
I think the reason the injunction only applied to the ban on grand-fathered possession was because rolling back the grand-fathered possession would cause irreparable harm. Especially given the perceived high likelihood of success at trial.
Reply With Quote
  #661  
Old 01-08-2018, 7:06 PM
aBrowningfan aBrowningfan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 546
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cockedandglocked View Post
But, let's not dive too far down that rabbit hole just yet, we haven't even finished in the lower courts yet
However, the DC felt that the likelihood of success at trial was high enough to justify granting the injunction....
Reply With Quote
  #662  
Old 01-08-2018, 10:36 PM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Not a mod or lawyer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 12,331
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aBrowningfan View Post
However, the DC felt that the likelihood of success at trial was high enough to justify granting the injunction....
True, but there's always a bit of unpredictable "luck of the draw" involved with these things, nobody gets to handpick the presiding appeals judges. But one of these days it seems like, just purely based on the laws of probability, that we'd score all the right judges at all the right times and get a win - I'm hopeful that this will be one of those times.
Reply With Quote
  #663  
Old 01-16-2018, 1:00 PM
Steve1968LS2's Avatar
Steve1968LS2 Steve1968LS2 is online now
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 7,856
iTrader: 72 / 99%
Default

Good News:

Quote:
Eighteen States, Law Enforcement, Doctors, and Firearm Rights Groups File Amicus Briefs in Lawsuit Challenging California 10+ Magazine Ban


On Friday, January 12, several amicus briefs were filed in support of the NRA and CRPA supported lawsuit challenging California’s restrictions against magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds. The lawsuit, titled Duncan v. Becerra, challenges California’s recently enacted ban on the possession of magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds as a result of Proposition 63, as well as all of California’s other restrictions on such magazines. The lawsuit challenges the restrictions as a violation of the Second Amendment, Due Process clause, and Takings clause of the United States Constitution.

Less than three days before California’s ban on the mere possession of magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds was scheduled to take effect, San Diego Federal District Court Judge Roger T. Benitez issued an order granting NRA and CRPA attorney’s request for an injunction while the lawsuit is pending. As a result, California gun owners who currently possess such magazines may continue to do so without fear of prosecution while the constitutionality of the law is decided in the courts. Unsurprisingly, the California Department of Justice has appealed the injunction to the Ninth Circuit.

In support of the plaintiffs, 18 States, including Arizona, Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Kansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah, West Virginia, Wyoming, filed an amicus brief illustrating how the Second Amendment protects magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds, and how California’s restrictions constitute a “taking” which requires just compensation to affected owners.

Several Law Enforcement and State and Local Firearm Rights groups also filed an amicus brief highlighting how California’s restrictions will not reduce violent crime, but instead will increase the danger to victims. The brief also states how magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds are not disproportionately used in attacks on law enforcement, and that California has failed to show that its restrictions will reduce mass shootings and injuries. The listed groups participating as an amicus include:


California State Sheriffs Association
Western States Sheriffs Association
California Reserve Peace Officers Association
San Francisco Veteran Police Officers Association
California Gang Investigators Association
International Law Enforcement Educators and Trainers Association
Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund
Law Enforcement Action Network
Law Enforcement Alliance of America
International Association of Law Enforcement Firearms Instructors
Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs
Bridgeville Rifle & Pistol Club
Connecticut Citizens Defense League
Delaware State Sportsmen’s Association
Gun Owners Action League Massachusetts
Gun Owners of California
Hawaii Rifle Association
Illinois State Rifle Association
Missourians for Personal Safety
New York State Rile & Pistol Association
Vermont Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs
Vermont State Rifle & Pistol Association
Virginia Shooting Sports Association
Western Missouri Shooters Alliance


Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership, the Independence Institute, Millennial Policy Center, and the National Rifle Association Freedom Action Foundation also filed amicus briefs, each detailing how magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds are in common use and therefore protected under the Second Amendment.

To stay up to date on the Duncan lawsuit, as well as other important Second Amendment issues here in California and across the nation, make sure to subscribe to NRA and CRPA email alerts. And be sure to visit the NRA-ILA website at www.StandAndFightCalifornia.com and the CRPA’s website at www.CRPA.org.
__________________
"Unless we keep the barbarian virtues, gaining the civilized ones will be of little avail. Oversentimentality, oversoftness, washiness, and mushiness are the great dangers of this age and of this people." Theodore Roosevelt

Member: Patron member NRA, lifetime member SAF, CRPA, Guardian Front Sight
Reply With Quote
  #664  
Old 01-16-2018, 2:50 PM
mshill's Avatar
mshill mshill is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,192
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cockedandglocked View Post
True, but there's always a bit of unpredictable "luck of the draw" involved with these things, nobody gets to handpick the presiding appeals judges. But one of these days it seems like, just purely based on the laws of probability, that we'd score all the right judges at all the right times and get a win - I'm hopeful that this will be one of those times.
Already happened in Peruta, and we all know how that turned out. I know we should be optimistic but it gets harder with each "en banc" and "SCOTUS refuses to hear" case that gets tossed on the garbage heap of what's left of the 2A.
__________________
Quote:
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.
Reply With Quote
  #665  
Old 01-16-2018, 6:30 PM
BAJ475's Avatar
BAJ475 BAJ475 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Butte County, California
Posts: 1,579
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

I particularly liked the sentence in the Amici brief of the 18 AGs where is says: "To the extent the Ninth Circuit has previously applied alternative tests foreclosed by Heller, this is an opportunity to hew to the proper standard for Second Amendment cases."
Reply With Quote
  #666  
Old 01-16-2018, 8:51 PM
thorium thorium is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: OC
Posts: 732
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

So the 9th circuit appeal is getting all briefed up... but when does the 3 judge panel get selected?
__________________
-------------------------
Reply With Quote
  #667  
Old 01-17-2018, 5:10 PM
RandyD's Avatar
RandyD RandyD is online now
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: La Jolla, California
Posts: 5,204
iTrader: 40 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve1968LS2 View Post
Good News:
I am interested in reading these briefs. I have looked but have not found any links where these briefs are in pdf form. Does anyone have any leads on where to find them?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #668  
Old 01-17-2018, 5:23 PM
Maltese Falcon's Avatar
Maltese Falcon Maltese Falcon is offline
Ordo Militaris Templi
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Glendale, CA
Posts: 5,881
iTrader: 73 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RandyD View Post
I am interested in reading these briefs. I have looked but have not found any links where these briefs are in pdf form. Does anyone have any leads on where to find them?
There are a couple here:

https://www.crpa.org/litigation/eigh...-magazine-ban/

Edit: It looks like those two cover everyone.

.
__________________
The deterioration of every government begins with the decay of the principles on which it was founded. Charles-Louis de Secondat (1689-1755) Baron de Montesquieu


In America, freedom and justice have always come from the ballot box, the jury box, and when that fails, the cartridge box.
Steve Symms, ex-U.S. Senator, Idaho

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 8:36 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.