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 > National 2nd Amend. Political & Legal Discussion
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

National 2nd Amend. Political & Legal Discussion Discuss national gun rights and 2A related political topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 07-11-2017, 12:14 PM
DEFCON ZERO DEFCON ZERO is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Contra Costa County
Posts: 372
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default My Political SCIENCE take on 2nd Amend defense.

Poly Sci being the relativity dry study of how Politics happen, and where and what effort to apply, etc.

1)Don't put RESOURCES into fighting anti-gun laws in CA, since CA govt will pretty much do anything and everything they can get away with under Constitutional restrictions. I'm not saying don't vote against them, etc, just don't squander TOO much actual money pissing into a hurricane.

2)Look to Fed level of Govt to protect 2nd in CA and other anti-2nd States, like 1950-60s Civil Rights, but "different". Different mostly because "Civil Rights" was not already in the original Bill of Rights, and involved things like brutally punishing innocent children with Forced Busing, etc.

3)IF we assume Trump is even 1/2 legit, and WOULD be pro-2nd if he had support or was prodded, then the thing to do is both support and prod him. Trump needs to get the message loud and clear that if he continues to disrespect the will of the voters we will leave him like Bernie supporters left Hillary. At the same time, make it clear that RINOs like Ryan, McCain etc are now the real enemy, since people like Waters and Pelosi only drive fence sitters to our cause.

4)Anything less than a National 2nd Amend enforcement bill that would vacate all State efforts to degrade 2nd should be seen as Anti-2nd. Don't be fooled by some guy like Paul Ryan voting "yes" on a few minor bills.

5)What we need is a 2nd Amend Civil Rights bill that sets out Criminal and Civil penalties for Infringing, as well as a clear path for citizens to sue for any Infrigments, which by necessity would be targeted almost exclusively at State and Local govt officials. Stopping a LGS from selling regular AR-15 would be like stopping Safeway from selling bread to Black people.

6)My UC Berk Poly Sci grad tells me Going Negative is always several times more effective than adding your name to group of supporters.

7)The last election showed the Voters on the NATIONAL level want real change, so don't be afraid to use that to attack RINOs, even if that means supporting a true 2nd DINO in order to force the RINO to support the 2nd.

8)US Winner Take All system means targeting wavering districts or officials is the only thing that works. Don't worry about 49 anti-2nd Senators, worry about the top 4 RINO fake 2nd Amend backstabbers (who can make all the gains of Trump, Trump's SCOTUS, and gains in House and Senate MEANINGLESS). As they say, "so near, yet so far". Look at how Pelosi rammed ObamaCare through via the backdoor, and very much against the polls. Where is our "Pelosi"?

9)Don't let RINOs tell you what 2nd Amend support means, attack them for their dishonestly and shame them.

10)Last but not least, if you are going to banter with CA Anti-Gun crowd, go directly to the voters and explain to them what their leadership is really saying is that non-White people in States like CA can't have the same sort of Rights and freedom as is taken for granted in largely White States, because the DNC and CA Dem Party is a Plantation, not a "big tent".


PS-don't forget about the "well regulated" meaning target and RELOADING practice as a reason to make the AR-15 especially a legally protected gun. You can't expect our troops to become top-shots after 6 weeks of Basic of which only a small fraction is on the rifle range, nor can you expect them to maintain skills for months when not training constantly.

Last edited by DEFCON ZERO; 07-11-2017 at 4:03 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 07-11-2017, 12:49 PM
R Dale R Dale is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,263
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Defcon Zero is spot on, states like CA and NJ will never have real change toward self defense rights until it is forced on them by the Federal gov.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07-11-2017, 12:52 PM
nedro nedro is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,923
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

SICK AND TIRED OF THIS LOOSER ATTITUDE!
SHUT THE HELL UP IF YOU DON'T WANT TO SUPPORT THE CA FIGHT!
__________________
Here in California; Law abiding Citizens are simply Useful Idiots and Criminals are a Protected Species.
<nedro>

"Venezuela didn't fail because they incorrectly implemented Socialism. They failed because they wholeheartedly implemented Socialism."
<Donald Trump>
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 07-11-2017, 12:57 PM
nedro nedro is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,923
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

What we need is to re-instill the "Self Sufficient" mindset that has built this Country. Any time someone mentions government assistance, think of them as UN AMERICAN TRAITORS! And someone to be persecuted.
Enough of this already.
__________________
Here in California; Law abiding Citizens are simply Useful Idiots and Criminals are a Protected Species.
<nedro>

"Venezuela didn't fail because they incorrectly implemented Socialism. They failed because they wholeheartedly implemented Socialism."
<Donald Trump>
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07-11-2017, 1:17 PM
DEFCON ZERO DEFCON ZERO is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Contra Costa County
Posts: 372
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nedro View Post
SICK AND TIRED OF THIS LOOSER ATTITUDE!
SHUT THE HELL UP IF YOU DON'T WANT TO SUPPORT THE CA FIGHT!
Its like this:

Your team needs to win one game to make to the payoffs.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7fjDS0jKiE

In your current game you are trailing by 30 points with 3 minutes to go, and your star QB, with no viable backup, has a sprained ankle, and maybe a mild concussion, making him slow and extra vulnerable to sacks.

But you are highly favored to win next TWO weeks, IF your star QB can play close to normal ability.

Do you keep him in the game hoping for about 5 or 6 miracles, or do you pull him and basically forfeit the game, planning to win at least one of next two games?

There is brave and there is just dumb.

Don't spend money to send an RV to Congresswoman Waters' district to call her out for selling out USA on 2nd Amend, send one to Ryan's district.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07-11-2017, 1:26 PM
DEFCON ZERO DEFCON ZERO is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Contra Costa County
Posts: 372
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by R Dale View Post
Defcon Zero is spot on, states like CA and NJ will never have real change toward self defense rights until it is forced on them by the Federal gov.
Yep, and that wont happen until the issue is forced onto RINOs.

Its tough going trying to push back on the ground against the other side.

Its far more effective, because its the truth, to call out phonies for their backstabbing.

If you really want to screw someone, install elected officials who claim to be on one side of an issue, and who make great show of support on minor meaningless bills, but who are really there to displace any honest support.

That is what we have now with RINOs.

We need to tell Ryan and McConnell we don't want their Veal Parm sandwich.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Ex-WIs6PgA
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 07-11-2017, 2:27 PM
-hanko's Avatar
-hanko -hanko is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Bay Area & SW Idaho
Posts: 10,195
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Thumbs down

Quote:
Originally Posted by nedro View Post
SICK AND TIRED OF THIS LOOSER ATTITUDE!
SHUT THE HELL UP IF YOU DON'T WANT TO SUPPORT THE CA FIGHT!
Sometimes facing reality is a real biatch.

Look at Californias history in the area of RKBA over the last 20 or 30 years .
__________________
"Tactical" is like boobs...you can sell anything with it....arf
I see the gulf of Mexico
As tiny as a tear
The coast of California
Must be somewhere over here, over here
Greatful Dead
“Heaven goes by favor. If it went by merit, you would stay out and your dog would go in.”
Mark Twain
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 07-11-2017, 3:02 PM
MissiontoMars MissiontoMars is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Sandy Eggo
Posts: 629
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Good post, OP...agreed on most points.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 07-11-2017, 3:18 PM
ECG_88's Avatar
ECG_88 ECG_88 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: San Diego
Posts: 441
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nedro View Post
SICK AND TIRED OF THIS LOOSER ATTITUDE!
SHUT THE HELL UP IF YOU DON'T WANT TO SUPPORT THE CA FIGHT!
I think the OP is proposing a new strategy in the fight. He is not saying we don't fight, he is saying we need to fight differently. Obviously our current strategy is not working/ not working fast enough to give us relief in our lifetimes.

I think aggressive federal prosecution of liberal officials on the grounds of civil rights violations will help.
__________________
Emotional appeal is a marketing tactic and not a foundation for effective argument.

Nulla Fatere, Omnia Nega, Accusatorem Accusa
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 07-11-2017, 4:28 PM
R Dale R Dale is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,263
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nedro View Post
SICK AND TIRED OF THIS LOOSER ATTITUDE!
SHUT THE HELL UP IF YOU DON'T WANT TO SUPPORT THE CA FIGHT!
It’s not a loser attitude it’s called reality.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 07-16-2017, 11:30 PM
retiredAFcop retiredAFcop is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: East Bay
Posts: 2,067
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DEFCON ZERO View Post


5)What we need is a 2nd Amend Civil Rights bill that sets out Criminal and Civil penalties for Infringing, as well as a clear path for citizens to sue for any Infrigments, which by necessity would be targeted almost exclusively at State and Local govt officials.
This.

We have already seen the leftists in that CA DOJ violate the requirements placed on them by the leftist ammunition control bill, and have seen no consequences.

In a just society with rule of law, one of two things would already have occurred - either the AG and DOJ officials responsible for this violation would already have been removed from public office/employment, and possibly charged with criminal negligence, or even conspiracy to violate the law, or, the laws itself would be summarily thrown out, on the basis that the state is not following their end of it.

When people like DeLeon conspire with others to deny citizens their rights through use of fraudulent and intentionally misleading statements, they need to be prosecuted for these crimes.
__________________
“Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter” ~ Martin Luther King, Jr.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 08-15-2017, 2:08 AM
ja308 ja308 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 7,858
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote "IF we assume Trump is even 1/2 legit, and WOULD be pro-2nd if he had support or was prodded, then the thing to do is both support and prod him. Trump needs to get the message loud and clear that if he continues to disrespect the will of the voters we will leave him like Bernie supporters left Hillary. At the same time, make it clear that RINOs like Ryan, McCain etc are now the real enemy, since people like Waters and Pelosi only drive fence sitters to our cause.'


WTH assume 1/2 legit ? Continues to disrespect the will of the voters, we will leave him ? where did he disrespect the voters ? Ryan is NRA A rated and not a RINO and yes I have some disagreement . Mccain has been a total screwup ever since he got elected and make no mistake Mccain is bad, but he's better than the best democrat .
You know for a Californian to make these statements really reflects poorly on us . I mean we cant even win dog catcher elections and here you are disrespecting the free state folks who really got Presicdnt Trump into office.
I suggest we let the NRA work on RKBA politics and we should try to get any republican elected. Mc cain is better than those we elect here ! sheesh


President Trump is in the NRA tent -- he doesn't need threats to do the right thing.
What he needs is our complete support to keep his poll numbers very high.
yeah Im saying even when the swamp makes a point against him and we could agree with the swamp media on a particular point.
That we tell the swamp to F off and our president knows better than them.

After all how many times did the swamp media find anything to disagree with or criticize when a democrat was in office ? answer ZERO .
Sheesh these pigs even covered for Clinton when he was convicted of perjury and accused of rape!
__________________
Contradictions do not exist. Whenever you think you are facing a contradiction, check your premises. You will find that one of them is wrong.
Ayn Rand

Last edited by ja308; 08-15-2017 at 2:24 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 08-15-2017, 8:46 AM
Jimi Jah's Avatar
Jimi Jah Jimi Jah is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: North San Diego County
Posts: 11,191
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Demographics will finish off any remaining gun rights here in California over the next two decades. The huge population growth here will assist that as newcomers are not interested in the Bill Of Rights. They want the bill of Welfare.

What you see is what will be. Options include moving or submitting, or going criminal.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 08-15-2017, 8:59 AM
Blade Gunner's Avatar
Blade Gunner Blade Gunner is online now
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 3,015
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Exclamation

Quote:
Originally Posted by R Dale View Post
Defcon Zero is spot on, states like CA and NJ will never have real change toward self defense rights until it is forced on them by the Federal gov.
HR 2098 (Defense of the Second Amendment Act) is a result of States such as CA passing laws in clear violation on 2A. While some have commented spending money to fight CA attacks on 2A is a waste, I would disagree. If no body objected to CA actions, there would be no judicial record through the 9th appeals court, and these issues would never surface to the national level. We now have conflicting rulings in at least two appellate courts that have caught both the attention of congress and hopefully SCOTUS (post Ginsberg and Kennedy).
I financially support CPRA, knowing at a state level their efforts most likely will not be successful, but also realizing their legal actions set the stage for a national resolution. I also get to annoy the Progs and list some of my donations on my tax return every year.
__________________
If you find yourself in a fair fight, you're doing it all wrong.

Last edited by Blade Gunner; 08-15-2017 at 9:09 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 08-15-2017, 9:33 AM
Blade Gunner's Avatar
Blade Gunner Blade Gunner is online now
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 3,015
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimi Jah View Post
Demographics will finish off any remaining gun rights here in California over the next two decades. The huge population growth here will assist that as newcomers are not interested in the Bill Of Rights. They want the bill of Welfare.

What you see is what will be. Options include moving or submitting, or going criminal.
Correct. The The Saul Alinsky plan involves taking over the educational system to produce useful idiots, which started way back in the 60's. Core curriculum no long includes US history and civics. The Progessive party (the Dem party died along time ago) is the party of more free stuff, welfare in one form or another. The election system is also rigged. The top two finishers in statewide races and term limits have given the Progs near total control over who is elected. As an elected Prog you only get to move up or out. Stray too far from the Prog party line and find yourself out of a job after your term is up. Statewide offices are no longer elected, they are anointed.
__________________
If you find yourself in a fair fight, you're doing it all wrong.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 08-15-2017, 10:37 AM
meno377's Avatar
meno377 meno377 is offline
小さな女性
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: (34.2283° N, 118.5358° W), (33.6700° N, 117.7800° W)
Posts: 3,839
iTrader: 60 / 100%
Default

One of the most misguided posts I have read yet. One huge element you left out OP is culture war. I will not post my own views about this, I will let User; Mitch explain as he has done an outstanding job explaining what the real problem is and how we should be fighting the state along with our country. You have to show opposition to change minds. But here is the brilliant post that Mitch delivered a few months ago:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mitch
None of the conspiracy theorists seem to understand the real purpose of these assault weapon bans. It would be nice if you would grasp and face reality, but you are too busy getting all up in your righteous indignation. I don't mean you, LSG, but your question raises the issue nicely.

First, try to get this through your heads: They don't care about your stupid guns! The purpose of the legislation is not to disarm you or prepare the ground for communist tyranny or whatever end of world, "Wolverines!" New World Order, Come and Take Them, Out of My Cold Dead Fingers, fantasy you have going on, it's simply to get re-elected. The purpose of gun control legislation is to show the folks back in the constituencies that you are doing something.

Today with term limits in California (which by the way have made a dysfunctional Legislature even worse, ask your NRA-ILA rep what he thinks about that about that), it's not so much to get re-elected, but to secure your position in the Democratic pecking order for higher office or ever more comfortable government party sinecures. But it amounts to the same thing: it's not about guns or even crime or public safety, it's about professional advancement.

And you can also put aside your partisan umbrage: Republicans do the same thing, unless you have some other explanation for why the House voted something like 200 times to rescind Obamacare while knowing the legislation wouldn't get anywhere with a Democratic controlled Senate.

Second, they pick gun control because it's a Culture War issue, and today fighting the Culture War is more important for both parties than actually solving problems. Gun control is right up there with abortion and transgender bathrooms and gay marriage and flag burning and all the other stupid crap that doesn't really affect very many people, but which gets almost all Americans worked up beyond the limits of reason. They don't care about your guns, they care that you have them and want them and that simply makes you a social enemy. And BTW you harbor the same irrational enmity against them because of harmless choices they have made, so you know how it feels.

The architects of the assault weapon bans have no interest whatever in how many seconds it takes you to change a magazine, or in any other technical detail that so absorbs people on this forum. They are simply trying to fight the Culture War.

The Roberti-Roos ban was developed after the Stockton shooting by looking through firearms distributor catalogs and making a list of the scariest looking guns. That's it! No one was concerned with the lethality of this or that model (as we know, all are equally lethal). They banned "AR-15s" and "AK-47s" and congratulated themselves and called it a day.

Then in a few years later SB23 tried to close the loopholes Roberti-Roos left behind with a features based ban, again, not because anyone gave a **** about the guns, but because guns were in the news in the wake of the Columbine shooting and it was another opportunity for a high visibility Culture War victory. The features ban obviously wasn't concerned with safety or lethality (flash suppressors don't make rifles more lethal), they were simply put together in an attempt to define the sorts of firearms they want to add to the ban (which is why the 1994 Federal ban included bayonet lugs; only military long guns have bayonet lugs). Once again, they reckoned they did a pretty good job of banning a whole mess of firearms, patted themselves on the back and called it a day.

After the Harrot decision, however, AR-15s and other scary black rifles reappeared in California, in huge numbers. Did the Legislature care? They did not. Again, they don't care about your guns. They passed their legislation and as far as anyone knew or cared these firearms were banned in California. A visit to any gun store would prove the lie, but most voters, and most of the Press, don't visit gun stores.

But as the off list lower and 80% mania got more and more visible, ambitious politicians sensed an opportunity. Not, I hasten to emphasize, an opportunity to ban guns and make the world a safer place, but an opportunity for more grandstanding and press conferences and even national visibility. The San Bernardino shooting was the catalyst for another opportunity for Culture War victory in the Legislature as well as with the referendum process (why do you think Gavin Newsom's proposition sought to ban something the Legislature had already banned? Because he seriously didn't think the legislation went far enough? No, it was because his name wasn't on it. Again, nothing to do with guns!).

Now we are in 2017 and we are running into people who, yes, really do sorta care about your guns, but they aren't in the Legislature. They are anonymous Culture Warriors in the Harris/Becerra DoJ who sense, correctly, that implementing the 2016 legislation as written would be a Culture War victory for a large number of California gun owners who would be able to throw away their hated bullet buttons. We're talking about potentially hundreds of thousands of AR-15s and other such rifles that could be freely configured in a normal free-state manner. The Legislature probably didn't understand that, and if they did they certainly wouldn't have cared. But the DoJ certainly does. And they do not want to see you win!

So this is not about guns, or safety, or paving the way for tyranny, or any of the other popular slogans. It's about Culture War. It's simply one of the issues the parties use to divide Americans and rally them to their respective flags. There is nothing "liberal" about gun control; there is nothing "conservative" about empowering the masses with free access to firearms (as several recent conversation here on Calguns have revealed: plenty of members don't really believe in a right of the people to keep an bear arms, not if the people are different from them). Essentially, gun control is an urban issue and the defenders of gun rights have more rural values, and that is how the parties are dividing the country these days.

And we can't win, not in California anyway. The reason we can't win is because you guys, the ones with the most to lose, refuse to do what you need to do to win the Culture Wars, which is to make Calguns and the gun rights community a truly big tent and stop driving people away simply because they are different from you or have a different worldview or even because they have two X chromosomes.

But you will never do that, will you? If a "libtard" comes around here you will make sure he knows he's a "libtard" and he is reviled as such and you will make sure he goes away and you will make sure gun rights in California are nothing but a happy memory.
__________________
In honor of Fjold:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fjold View Post
I've been married so long that I don't even look both ways when I cross the street.
Quote:
A society that aims for equality before liberty, will end with neither equality nor liberty.
-Milton Friedman


Quote:
It’s always seemed to me absurd that you make 100% of the people to do something, in order to make sure that 1 or 2% of the people don’t behave badly.
-Milton Friedman

Last edited by meno377; 08-15-2017 at 10:42 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 08-15-2017, 11:07 AM
tuolumnejim's Avatar
tuolumnejim tuolumnejim is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Stagecoach, Nv.
Posts: 10,151
iTrader: 29 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by -hanko View Post
Sometimes facing reality is a real biatch.

Look at Californias history in the area of RKBA over the last 20 or 30 years .
I don't need to look at it, I lived it and saw where it was going. Hello from a free State.
__________________
There is no crueler tyranny than that which is perpetuated under the shield of law and in the name of justice.
Charles de Montesquieu

“In a state where corruption abounds, laws must be very numerous.”
Publius Cornelius Scipio

Malo periculosam libertatem quam quietam servitutem
"I prefer liberty with danger to peace with slavery"
Count Palatine of Posen
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 08-15-2017, 1:08 PM
ja308 ja308 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 7,858
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Meno
With all respect to the analysis provide by Mitch. Both you and He are wrong if you think the democrat party does not want to take away your right to own a gun !

The culture war is just an aspect of this fight to disarm Americans and yes I can prove it beyond any doubt!

Mitch and you think by advocating and pandering to democrat agenda points we can win the battle for RKBA. This is also wrong as the democrat party has an unlimited supply of issues to divide and polarize. In fact we need the religious right to elect pro gun candidates! Trump had lots of help from the religious right.Without them we would be looking at the Hilldog and another Kagen,Ginsburg or sotomayer on the court !

I say to all the liberal/democrat potential cal gunners. For your liberty and those of future unborn generations. Cut off all swamp anti gun media, because by parroting their lines you appear really ignorant.
__________________
Contradictions do not exist. Whenever you think you are facing a contradiction, check your premises. You will find that one of them is wrong.
Ayn Rand
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 08-15-2017, 1:17 PM
meno377's Avatar
meno377 meno377 is offline
小さな女性
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: (34.2283° N, 118.5358° W), (33.6700° N, 117.7800° W)
Posts: 3,839
iTrader: 60 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ja308 View Post
Meno
With all respect to the analysis provide by Mitch. Both you and He are wrong if you think the democrat party does not want to take away your right to own a gun !

The culture war is just an aspect of this fight to disarm Americans and yes I can prove it beyond any doubt!

Mitch and you think by advocating and pandering to democrat agenda points we can win the battle for RKBA. This is also wrong as the democrat party has an unlimited supply of issues to divide and polarize. In fact we need the religious right to elect pro gun candidates! Trump had lots of help from the religious right.Without them we would be looking at the Hilldog and another Kagen,Ginsburg or sotomayer on the court !

I say to all the liberal/democrat potential cal gunners. For your liberty and those of future unborn generations. Cut off all swamp anti gun media, because by parroting their lines you appear really ignorant.
It goes more abroad than the Democratic Party. Again it's our culture. The best line of defense for the long term is educating our children. That's how the Democrats achieved it in the 80s and 90s. Eric Holder's video from '95' is a classic example:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RXwo9lARAgg

I am not saying that we shouldn't attack the Democratic Party. We need to change our culture which includes all parties involved.
__________________
In honor of Fjold:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fjold View Post
I've been married so long that I don't even look both ways when I cross the street.
Quote:
A society that aims for equality before liberty, will end with neither equality nor liberty.
-Milton Friedman


Quote:
It’s always seemed to me absurd that you make 100% of the people to do something, in order to make sure that 1 or 2% of the people don’t behave badly.
-Milton Friedman

Last edited by meno377; 08-15-2017 at 1:24 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 08-15-2017, 3:56 PM
tankarian's Avatar
tankarian tankarian is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 4,048
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nedro View Post
SICK AND TIRED OF THIS LOOSER ATTITUDE!
SHUT THE HELL UP IF YOU DON'T WANT TO SUPPORT THE CA FIGHT!
You off your meds buddy? Why you screaming at us?
__________________
BLACK RIFLES MATTER!

Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 08-15-2017, 5:20 PM
sarabellum sarabellum is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,036
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DEFCON ZERO View Post
Poly Sci being the relativity dry study of how Politics happen, and where and what effort to apply, etc.
Cite your authorities. C. Wright Mills' works are fascinating regarding the relationship between the state and capital. Max Weber and Saul Alinsky are a good source for how to organize popular action. Adults need not be entertained to learn.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DEFCON ZERO View Post
2)Look to Fed level of Govt to protect 2nd in CA and other anti-2nd States, like 1950-60s Civil Rights, but "different". Different mostly because "Civil Rights" was not already in the original Bill of Rights, and involved things like brutally punishing innocent children with Forced Busing, etc.
We reviewed the kind of legislation needed vis-a-vis any grant of power the constitution provides to congress to legislate. One such grant of power is the taxing and spending power to impose conditions upon the states in exchange for receipt of a grant. We covered that. The other grant of power to legislate is an extremely narrow one under the Art. 1, §8 and III Am. army power. We covered that, too.

That the original constitution of 1776 was missing the Bill of Rights (enacted on or about 1789) does not tell us much about the constitution or the development of constitutional doctrine by the only body empowered by Art. III to interpret its fundamental meaning, the U.S. Supreme Court and the rest of the federal judiciary. You overlook the Penumbra doctrine and Equal Protection clauses. "Brutally punishing" while riding a bus is a concept your learned from Political Science? Cite your authority.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DEFCON ZERO View Post
5)What we need is a 2nd Amend Civil Rights bill that sets out Criminal and Civil penalties for Infringing, as well as a clear path for citizens to sue for any Infrigments, which by necessity would be targeted almost exclusively at State and Local govt officials.
The federal government does not have a police power to directly legislate in the areas of health, safety, and morals reserved by the States. We addressed that constitutional doctrine already.


Cite your authorities.

Last edited by sarabellum; 08-17-2017 at 5:59 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 08-16-2017, 11:22 PM
ja308 ja308 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 7,858
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

from sarabellum
That the original constitution of 1776 was missing the Bill of Rights (enacted on or about 1868) does not tell us much about the constitution or the development of constitutional doctrine...

I believe the original bill of rights were adopted around 1790.
The 1870 was 15 th amendment.
__________________
Contradictions do not exist. Whenever you think you are facing a contradiction, check your premises. You will find that one of them is wrong.
Ayn Rand
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 08-17-2017, 5:58 PM
sarabellum sarabellum is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,036
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ja308 View Post
from sarabellum
That the original constitution of 1776 was missing the Bill of Rights (enacted on or about 1868) does not tell us much about the constitution or the development of constitutional doctrine...

I believe the original bill of rights were adopted around 1790.
The 1870 was 15 th amendment.
You are right. I will correct it.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 08-17-2017, 6:13 PM
Mayor McRifle's Avatar
Mayor McRifle Mayor McRifle is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Central California
Posts: 5,063
iTrader: 13 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nedro View Post
SICK AND TIRED OF THIS LOOSER ATTITUDE!
SHUT THE HELL UP IF YOU DON'T WANT TO SUPPORT THE CA FIGHT!
Amen.
__________________
Anchors Aweigh

Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 08-17-2017, 7:14 PM
ScottyXbones's Avatar
ScottyXbones ScottyXbones is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 827
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Just a comment on #5, its been clear throughout history that autocrats will absolve themselves of any wrongdoing (against their constitutional limits on power), especially if there is a penalty. Do you expect politicians to investigate themselves? Of course not, it would just be another tool of partisan politics.

The penalty for violating the constitution was built into it, its not jail time, its the second amendment itself.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 08-17-2017, 7:20 PM
357manny's Avatar
357manny 357manny is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 1,194
iTrader: 21 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by meno377 View Post
One of the most misguided posts I have read yet. One huge element you left out OP is culture war. I will not post my own views about this, I will let User; Mitch explain as he has done an outstanding job explaining what the real problem is and how we should be fighting the state along with our country. You have to show opposition to change minds. But here is the brilliant post that Mitch delivered a few months ago:
Meno,
glad you brought this post from Mitch up. I don't agree with everything, but his points about opening our mind to what's really going on is spot on. Mitch's insight is sorely missed here.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 08-17-2017, 8:04 PM
DEFCON ZERO DEFCON ZERO is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Contra Costa County
Posts: 372
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sarabellum View Post
"Brutally punishing" while riding a bus is a concept your learned from Political Science? Cite your authority.


The federal government does not have a police power to directly legislate in the areas of health, safety, and morals reserved by the States. We addressed that constitutional doctrine already.


Cite your authorities.
Bussing attacked both Black and White children in diff ways.

1)It dropped unprotected White kids into violently radicalized Black schools where they became punching bags the second they stepped off the buses.


2)It separated Black kids from their parents, and their parent's natural parental discipline, and turned them from students in their own schools to raiders out to plunder "enemy" schools.

It also added 1-2 hours of wasted time each and every day, not to mention taking funds for books and using them for buses.

Anyone who grew up in the 60s and 70s has heard the same horror stories, if not lived them.

Naturally, all the Coffee House Communist elites who forced busing on others sent their kids to private schools.


" federal government does not have a police power to directly legislate in the areas of health, safety, and morals reserved by the States" Really, because in everything from medical to construction to cars to public schools I'm always hearing about Fed this or that regs.

Last edited by DEFCON ZERO; 08-17-2017 at 8:07 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 08-17-2017, 9:11 PM
DEFCON ZERO DEFCON ZERO is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Contra Costa County
Posts: 372
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

"Originally Posted by Mitch
None of the conspiracy theorists seem to understand the real purpose of these assault weapon bans. It would be nice if you would grasp and face reality, but you are too busy getting all up in your righteous indignation. I don't mean you, LSG, but your question raises the issue nicely.

First, try to get this through your heads: They don't care about your stupid guns!......."

Makes sense. I don't see anything but token efforts to actually Grab Guns. Almost seems like they WANT lots of loose guns rattling around so they are still "an issue" for Culture Wars.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 08-17-2017, 11:56 PM
meno377's Avatar
meno377 meno377 is offline
小さな女性
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: (34.2283° N, 118.5358° W), (33.6700° N, 117.7800° W)
Posts: 3,839
iTrader: 60 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 357manny View Post
Meno,
glad you brought this post from Mitch up. I don't agree with everything, but his points about opening our mind to what's really going on is spot on. Mitch's insight is sorely missed here.
Agree.
__________________
In honor of Fjold:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fjold View Post
I've been married so long that I don't even look both ways when I cross the street.
Quote:
A society that aims for equality before liberty, will end with neither equality nor liberty.
-Milton Friedman


Quote:
It’s always seemed to me absurd that you make 100% of the people to do something, in order to make sure that 1 or 2% of the people don’t behave badly.
-Milton Friedman
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 08-18-2017, 7:57 PM
kcbrown's Avatar
kcbrown kcbrown is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 8,241
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sarabellum View Post
The federal government does not have a police power to directly legislate in the areas of health, safety, and morals reserved by the States. We addressed that constitutional doctrine already.
With Commerce Clause jurisprudence in its current state, there is scant difference between legislating directly and legislating with a claim of interstate commerce regulation. Per Gonzales v Raich, only a "rational basis" that the overarching activity in question "substantially effects" interstate commerce is required, no matter how infinitesimally small a subset the action under consideration is with respect to that overarching activity, since the courts interpret the Clause as empowering Congress to regulate any and all actions of any kind "that are part of an 'economic class' of activities that have a substantial effect on interstate commerce".

Put another way, as long as the action under consideration is any subset of any other activity that, in turn, has a "substantial effect" on interstate commerce, the action can be regulated by Congress. This takes us right back to the state of affairs as of Wickard.


There are few actions indeed that do not have some kind of effect on interstate commerce, or which are not a subset of any activity which substantially affects interstate commerce. To take but one example, riding your bicycle down the street is an action that Congress can regulate (or even prohibit!) because that action is a subset of the activity of transportation, which has massive interstate commerce effects.
__________________
The Constitution is not "the Supreme Law of the Land, except in the face of contradicting law which has not yet been overturned by the courts". It is THE SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND, PERIOD. You break your oath to uphold the Constitution if you don't refuse to enforce unadjudicated laws you believe are Unconstitutional.

The real world laughs at optimism. And here's why.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 08-18-2017, 9:10 PM
LBDamned's Avatar
LBDamned LBDamned is offline
Made in the USA
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Free in AZ!!! yes, it's worth the Pain to make it happen!
Posts: 11,105
iTrader: 51 / 100%
Default

Cliff Notes anyone?...

Topic seems like it might be worthwhile - but cotent looks like it might be a waste of time...

As with many blowhard subjects here - sometimes everything stated can be summarized in one paragraph.

If this is not one of those, tell me so and I'll move along
__________________
http://i1329.photobucket.com/albums/w558/LBDamneds/Misc/III_zpsofbisb36.jpg
-----------------------------
Dignity, Respect, Purpose - Live It!
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 08-18-2017, 11:20 PM
Lonestargrizzly's Avatar
Lonestargrizzly Lonestargrizzly is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 4,804
iTrader: 16 / 100%
Default

What do you mean by point #6?
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 08-19-2017, 4:50 PM
Lifeisgood Lifeisgood is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: San Diego
Posts: 144
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

re: #6 - change happens because supporters fight FOR something they want. Paul Ryan will be defeated because people want the things that he's preventing them from having.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 08-20-2017, 10:25 AM
Jimi Jah's Avatar
Jimi Jah Jimi Jah is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: North San Diego County
Posts: 11,191
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ja308 View Post
from sarabellum
That the original constitution of 1776 was missing the Bill of Rights (enacted on or about 1868) does not tell us much about the constitution or the development of constitutional doctrine...

I believe the original bill of rights were adopted around 1790.
The 1870 was 15 th amendment.
It was George Mason of Virginia that refused to sign the original Constitution because it lacked those basic rights of man. He was shunned for it. However, his concepts were adopted into the original 12 Bill of Rights, 10 of which were agreed upon.

Which Cal Guns scholar can list the two admendments that were not included?
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 08-20-2017, 10:34 AM
hermosabeach's Avatar
hermosabeach hermosabeach is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 11,153
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

California had a prop to ban all handguns..... Tards were the only ones who said don't fight it.....

What happens in CA spreads like wildfire


OP
Look at the 1989 Roberti- Roos bill and overlay that to the 1994 federal AWB....

Or look at Hitler's gun control acts and the 1968 GCA






You stop rodents when you first find them....
You stop weeds before they take root and propagate


Fight
Fight
Fight
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 08-20-2017, 10:36 AM
hermosabeach's Avatar
hermosabeach hermosabeach is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 11,153
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Only one hand gun


California Proposition 15 was on the November 2, 1982 ballot in California, where it was defeated.
Proposition 15 would have required owners of handguns to register them with the Department of Justice on or before November 2, 1983. It would have restricted the number of handguns in California by:

Allowing the Department of Justice to issue registration cards only for handguns registered by November 2, 1983 (with specified exceptions).
Specifying that an individual may register only one handgun purchased between January 1, 1982, and April 30, 1983.
Restricting the importation of handguns into the state, and,
Prohibiting the purchase of handguns by mail.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 08-20-2017, 10:59 AM
Mayor McRifle's Avatar
Mayor McRifle Mayor McRifle is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Central California
Posts: 5,063
iTrader: 13 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimi Jah View Post
It was George Mason of Virginia that refused to sign the original Constitution because it lacked those basic rights of man. He was shunned for it. However, his concepts were adopted into the original 12 Bill of Rights, 10 of which were agreed upon.

Which Cal Guns scholar can list the two admendments that were not included?
http://teachinghistory.org/history-c...istorian/21861
__________________
Anchors Aweigh

Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 08-20-2017, 12:54 PM
DEFCON ZERO DEFCON ZERO is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Contra Costa County
Posts: 372
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimi Jah View Post
It was George Mason of Virginia that refused to sign the original Constitution because it lacked those basic rights of man. He was shunned for it. However, his concepts were adopted into the original 12 Bill of Rights, 10 of which were agreed upon.

Which Cal Guns scholar can list the two admendments that were not included?
I got a better one for ya.

The ancient Egyptians had a list and MATRICES of 24 Commandments (24 can be factored by 2,3,4,6,8 and 12), 10 of which made it into the Jewish bible as "The Ten Commandments".

What was left out? (besides the whole matrix thing)

teaser: The left out Egyptian commandments are a lot more substantial and fundamental then the minor administrative missing 2 Amendments, and many are more important than the 10 commandments that did make it into the Bible.

Last edited by DEFCON ZERO; 08-20-2017 at 12:57 PM..
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 12:30 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, 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.