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, 1:39 PM
phdo's Avatar
phdo phdo is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,856
iTrader: 27 / 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, 1:50 PM
taperxz taperxz is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 15,945
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, 2:42 PM
OCRebote78's Avatar
OCRebote78 OCRebote78 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Remudadero
Posts: 280
iTrader: 11 / 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, 8:05 PM
oc16's Avatar
oc16 oc16 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Orange
Posts: 716
iTrader: 4 / 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, 8:59 PM
caliguy93's Avatar
caliguy93 caliguy93 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: North Koreafornia
Posts: 419
iTrader: 2 / 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, 10:47 AM
Paladin's Avatar
Paladin Paladin is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SFBA
Posts: 7,459
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.

225+ examples of CCWs Saving Lives.

KnifeRights.org/images/KRbanner_468x60-1.gif
Reply With Quote
  #2207  
Old 01-13-2018, 2:46 PM
Solidsnake87's Avatar
Solidsnake87 Solidsnake87 is online now
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 4,129
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
Reply With Quote
  #2208  
Old 01-13-2018, 5:05 PM
BCA142's Avatar
BCA142 BCA142 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Northern Corruptifornia
Posts: 609
iTrader: 10 / 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: Patron
Calguns Supporter
Firearms Policy Coalition Supporter
Reply With Quote
  #2209  
Old 01-14-2018, 8:05 AM
abinsinia's Avatar
abinsinia abinsinia is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 389
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, 3:49 PM
TruOil TruOil is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 155
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, 4:50 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 4:54 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #2212  
Old 01-17-2018, 7:03 AM
Califpatriot Califpatriot is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 124
iTrader: 4 / 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, 11:42 AM
champu's Avatar
champu champu is offline
NRA Member, CRPA Member,
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Redondo Beach
Posts: 526
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, 12:04 PM
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: 14,419
iTrader: 63 / 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, 4:08 PM
TruOil TruOil is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 155
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 4:10 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #2216  
Old 01-17-2018, 11:33 PM
pistol3 pistol3 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 243
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 01-18-2018, 12:48 AM
Saym14 Saym14 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: So Cal
Posts: 7,542
iTrader: 141 / 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
__________________
Off roster handguns for sale
HK VP9 LE BNIB
CZ P09 black 9mm
SA XDM OD green 9 mm

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s....php?t=1358392
Reply With Quote
  #2218  
Old 01-18-2018, 11:41 AM
BAJ475's Avatar
BAJ475 BAJ475 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Butte County, California
Posts: 1,591
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, 2:22 PM
TruOil TruOil is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 155
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, 2:53 PM
Drivedabizness's Avatar
Drivedabizness Drivedabizness is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Folsom, CA
Posts: 1,933
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, 9:39 PM
Paladin's Avatar
Paladin Paladin is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SFBA
Posts: 7,459
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.

225+ examples of CCWs Saving Lives.

KnifeRights.org/images/KRbanner_468x60-1.gif
Reply With Quote
  #2222  
Old 01-20-2018, 2:53 PM
Rastoff's Avatar
Rastoff Rastoff is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: So Cal (Near Edwards AFB)
Posts: 665
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, 3:35 PM
Librarian's Avatar
Librarian Librarian is offline
Super Moderator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Concord
Posts: 36,537
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.
__________________
[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
  #2224  
Old 01-21-2018, 3:23 PM
Rastoff's Avatar
Rastoff Rastoff is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: So Cal (Near Edwards AFB)
Posts: 665
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
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 9:20 AM.




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.