|
California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism Discuss gun rights activism and 2A related political topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel. |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#42
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#43
|
|||
|
|||
To all the lawyers on the forum... and those smarter than I... could the mere proposal of this (law-edited)bill constitute a case for incorporation? Seems like this bill violates both Section 9 and the 10th Amendment and since we have bills pending at the Federal level that clearly state the Federal suppositions must avoid being de-facto, even SUGGESTING de-facto law seems unconstitutional to me. IMHO
Last edited by PhillyGunner; 01-25-2013 at 10:21 AM.. |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
I don't see why they would have to compensate anybody. Seizure of illegal items never needs compensation. A charge of "unlawful possession of a firearm" will be treated the same as "unlawful possession of a controlled substance" or "unlawful possession of explosives".
|
#45
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
I foresee two options at the most. #1. Remove your "grandfathered" firearm from this state and store it in another. #2. Deliver your "grandfathered" firearm into the waiting hands of your local LEO to be carted off to the foundry to be melted into re-bar to air in rebuilding CA's aging infrastructure. You will receive a hearty handshake and a thank you for your donation from the representative of our lords and masters.
__________________
If you haven't seen it with your own eyes, or heard it with your own ears, don't make it up with your small mind, or spread it with your big mouth. |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
randian- section 9 of the constitution states "... no ex-post facto Law shall be passed." This means you can't make illegal what was legal. How can an item be both illegal and legal at the same time?
|
#47
|
|||
|
|||
No, it means that I can't make your previously legal possession illegal. I can make your current and future possession illegal.
|
#48
|
||||
|
||||
You need to read up on what the rest of the universe calls "the law".
__________________
NRA lifetime member 2AF Defender member When did I go from being a "citizen" to a "taxpayer"? Jon Lovitz: ‘I can’t wait to go to a hospital run by the DMV!’ Peace, love, and heavy weapons. Sometimes you have to be insistent." - David Lee Roth |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
As a Ret. LEO I say good luck collecting these guns. All I would say is "their not here, you can not come in my house, come back with a warrant and you can see for yourself". Next be on the phone to a lawyer and be ready to comply when my door gets kicked in a few hours later. This is a "concern" we have lived with as RAW owners for 20+ years and I am sure nearly everyone has their own plan on what and how they will address this issue.
Me, I can't give them what is out of their reach, and no, I would not use the fell in the ocean bit. Because when it is found to be unconstitutional and thrown out I will want to use my RAWs in Ca. again. But then again by that time I will be a resident of a state that believes in the Constitution. |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
First, sorry guys, noticed in post #44 I was typing faster than thinking and used 'de-facto' twice... meant ex-post facto.
Guess I'm still confused, randian. I believe the concept of ex-post facto to mean exactly that... that a current possession can not, now, be made illegal when it was previously legal. It does not however cover future possessions, but if the language of the bill itself makes the bill unconstitutional, then in theory at least, it can't become law and would have no bearing on current or future possessions. That is why I am curious if a bill that is so clearly unconstitutional in its very suggestion, that the protected group (Californians) could take a case to the California State Supreme to require Incorporation... California's legal system to follow the limit of the Federal Law on the subject and make CA's gun control law subject to the Constitution and current Federal Law. But I'm no lawyer, and certainly no Constitutional scholar... just thinking through my fingers. If I have this all wrong, please continue to set me straight. |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Furthermore, it is well settled law that contraband, which X is under this hypothetical law, need not be compensated if it is seized by law enforcement. Why else do you think drug raids aren't compensable events? I don't recall compensation being paid when anti-drug laws were first being passed. The courts were perfectly fine letting existing lawful property become contraband, and not compensating its owners for seizure. |
#52
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
If they make it a crime to own an AW starting on 1 Jan 2014, then you cannot own an AW on 1 Jan 2014 without breaking the law. Example: Cocaine was once 100% legal to own and use in the US. On the day before it became illegal, you could have a kilo sitting on your dining room table, and you could be shoveling it up your nose to your hearts content. On the day that it actually became illegal, if you were caught in possession of that very same kilo of cocaine, you would be arrested, taken to jail, and tried in court for the crime of cocaine possession. No grandfathering that kilo of cocaine because it was pre-ban cocaine.
__________________
If you haven't seen it with your own eyes, or heard it with your own ears, don't make it up with your small mind, or spread it with your big mouth. |
#53
|
||||
|
||||
Registration = (Eventual) Confiscation.
I was STUPID to think they wouldn't stoop this low when I made my "What's wrong with Registration" thread...
__________________
Do what all great men would do: Tuck your head between your legs and kiss your *** goodbye. -Jake71 There's lots of players on the team. Not everyone gets to play "Quarterback". -CEDaytonaRydr Last edited by RMP91; 01-25-2013 at 12:30 PM.. |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
I don't understand your confusion. |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
We are continuely fighting politicians on their ground so why not take it away from them? How about suing them personally and working to drag them out from under the color of their jobs? How about recall petitions using volunteers to get signatures? How about researching legal cases to file criminal or legal sanctions against people. tie them up in legitimate legal issues so they don't have the time for this crap and let others know they are being watched and it could happen to them. If we get one then people with other issues (non-gun) might jump on board to mail those who are anti-gun if those poiticians just happen to be pissing other people like deep pocket old fashion farmers. we need to change our attack posture and take them out of their game rather than fighting them on their ground. Bankrupt a legislaturer with legitimate lawsuits and the rest will run. Remember we are fighting cowards who would not take up a gun to defend this country or their families.
|
#56
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#57
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
NRA lifetime member 2AF Defender member When did I go from being a "citizen" to a "taxpayer"? Jon Lovitz: ‘I can’t wait to go to a hospital run by the DMV!’ Peace, love, and heavy weapons. Sometimes you have to be insistent." - David Lee Roth |
#59
|
||||
|
||||
Can one of you legal eagles clarify something for me.
I would assume that this new bill would need to permanently amend all others that have a grandfather clause to make them apply? I guess what I'm asking is this: If there's a bill that says 'no more grandfather clauses' and another that has a grandfather clause, which trumps which? How does that work?
__________________
WTB: multiautomatic ghost gun with a .30-caliber clip to disperse with 30 bullets within half a second. Must include shoulder thing that goes up. Memberships/Affiliations: CERT, ARRL ARES, NRA Patron Member, HRC, CGN/CGSSA, Cal-FFL |
#60
|
||||
|
||||
Just added the link to the bill - http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/fa...201320140AB174 - to the first post.
If you would kindly follow that link, you would see a tab at the far right "Comments to Author". That's a feature of the new presentation of the bill-tracking software. Please use that provided access to the office of the legislator. I wouldn't bother saying any more than 'I oppose this bill'.
__________________
ARCHIVED Calguns Foundation Wiki here: http://web.archive.org/web/201908310...itle=Main_Page "The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."Ann Althouse: “Begin with the hypothesis that what they did is what they wanted to do. If they postured that they wanted to do something else, regard that as a con. Work from there. The world will make much more sense.” Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs. |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
Order of passage. Later one controls if they are in conflict.
|
#62
|
||||
|
||||
Thanks radian.
Damn that's just low...
__________________
WTB: multiautomatic ghost gun with a .30-caliber clip to disperse with 30 bullets within half a second. Must include shoulder thing that goes up. Memberships/Affiliations: CERT, ARRL ARES, NRA Patron Member, HRC, CGN/CGSSA, Cal-FFL |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
If I'm wrong, say why I'm wrong. Then I can stop being wrong. Responding to my every post with vacuous insinuations is abusive and ignore-worthy.
|
#64
|
||||
|
||||
You haven't proven where you're RIGHT. Until you cite proven case law where an example like this has been upheld by SCOTUS, you have no validity either.
__________________
NRA lifetime member 2AF Defender member When did I go from being a "citizen" to a "taxpayer"? Jon Lovitz: ‘I can’t wait to go to a hospital run by the DMV!’ Peace, love, and heavy weapons. Sometimes you have to be insistent." - David Lee Roth |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
What the heck are you talking about? I don't have to cite SCOTUS to repeat what ex post facto means, nor do I have to cite SCOTUS regarding what actually happened when other lawful property (drugs) was made contraband, namely that owners were not compensated for that. I also don't have to cite SCOTUS to make an analogy regarding drugs and guns, namely that if governments didn't have to compensate owners for making drugs contraband, they don't have to compensate owners for making guns contraband.
|
#66
|
||||
|
||||
If ANYTHING like this ever makes it to law (dear god forbid the thought), I will personally spend several hours to cut the chunk of metal with the serial number on it out of every firearm I own and tell them every gun has been disposed of.
I dare them to search my property. They have a better chance of finding Jimmy Hoffa. Of this I swear to the end of time.
__________________
Anyway...here's a dearth of reasoning to ponder: http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Guns |
#67
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
NRA lifetime member 2AF Defender member When did I go from being a "citizen" to a "taxpayer"? Jon Lovitz: ‘I can’t wait to go to a hospital run by the DMV!’ Peace, love, and heavy weapons. Sometimes you have to be insistent." - David Lee Roth |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
The Ex Post Facto would seem to apply, but who knows, as has been stated in this thread, it will take months to years to get through court and by then your RAW will have been a soda can 10 times over. Fact of the matter is, California has done this in the past with the SKS. I am not sure if that was later overruled, but lots of ppl lost their guns in that move.
As to your point about a court case to stop this. A bill has no force of law, it has not passed, so no court is going to take it up. After it passes, and when someone with standing challenges it, is when a court can look at it. Probably start in federal court, appeal to 9th circuit, then to SCOUTS -- years. |
#69
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
SCOTUS said in Whipple v. Martinson "There can be no question of the authority of the State in the exercise of its police power to regulate the administration, sale, prescription, and use of dangerous and habit-forming drugs..." Sounds like a statement of near-unbounded authority to ban possession of previously lawful property, which is what anti-drug acts are and were. Why would you think guns can get better treatment? |
#70
|
||||
|
||||
Oaths of office should be revised to include acknowledgment of the penalties for breaching the oath.
"I do solemnly swear to uphold the Constitution of the United States of America and hereby submit to a sentence of no less than 99 years in federal pound-me-in-the-*** prison should I fail to adhere to these terms I do so swear"...etc.
__________________
Just taking up space in (what is no longer) the second-worst small town in California. |
#71
|
|||
|
|||
Sanity - I predict a booming firearms storage business in either Nevada or Arizona until this gets hashed out by the 9 black robes if this becomes law.
Quote:
__________________
"The California matrix of gun control laws is among the harshest in the nation and are filled with criminal law traps for people of common intelligence who desire to obey the law." - U.S. District Judge Roger T. Benitez |
#73
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
I don't expect every individual representative to be constitutional scholars, but there's enough people working to figure out what's what. |
#74
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#75
|
||||
|
||||
Hiding or non-compiance are NOT an option. Defeating the bills -- all of them is the only hope -- how many CA residents (and guys I know in other states) never registered or modified their rifles after various new laws and the AWB -- and only recently with all this new activity told me that realized their guns have been felonies for nearly 20 years!
Its a lot easier to MAKE us into criminals and then wait for us to show up at the range than kick down our doors. and safer for cops. |
#77
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Fast forward to 2013. There are people who legally possess a certain class of gun. If possession of those guns is made a crime, I expect they will not be compensated for their loss. The analogy is exact. Why do you have trouble with it? |
#78
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
Quote:
Quote:
|
#79
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Even the notorious SKS issue was a forced buyback, not a confiscation without compensation. Stop spreading FUD.
__________________
NRA lifetime member 2AF Defender member When did I go from being a "citizen" to a "taxpayer"? Jon Lovitz: ‘I can’t wait to go to a hospital run by the DMV!’ Peace, love, and heavy weapons. Sometimes you have to be insistent." - David Lee Roth |
#80
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
No, but the right to be free of unreasonable seizures in your person, house, papers and effects certainly is a fundamental right.
__________________
NRA Life Member No posts of mine on Calguns are to be construed as legal advice, which can only be given by a lawyer. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|