|
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 |
#241
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
What are the implications of the common use test? Do you think it would help or hurt the court case to have not many semiatutomatic rifles registered? Do you like hurting your own self interest or are you just so weirdly mad that it clouds your critical thinking skills? -Gene
__________________
Gene Hoffman Chairman, California Gun Rights Foundation DONATE NOW to support the rights of California gun owners. Follow @cgfgunrights on Twitter. Opinions posted in this account are my own and not the approved position of any organization. I read PMs. But, if you need a response, include an email address or email me directly! "The problem with being a gun rights supporter is that the left hates guns and the right hates rights." -Anon
|
#242
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
There is no justification for the public servant police to be more heavily armed than the law-abiding public they serve...Unless...the government's intention is to be more powerful than the people. |
#243
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Squash this bill and get RAW's and normal functioning AR's back via the courts. Why register all these guns for a lawsuit? |
#244
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Me cute? LOL look who's talking... |
#245
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
That footwork may involve credible threats at some point, but have to come later in the game *well after the wording has been solidified*. And i'm as skeptical as you of a veto, but the credible threat may at least still be of use at that stage.
__________________
The Rifle on the Wall "“[S]cientific proof” of both gun-rights and gun-control theories “is very hard to get”; therefore, requiring “some substantial scientific proof to show that a [firearm] law will indeed substantially reduce crime and injury” is tantamount to applying strict scrutiny to, and almost certainly will lead to invalidation of, the law." - Kamala Harris Lawyers and their Stockholm Syndrome |
#246
|
||||
|
||||
I believe it is useless, unless it overwhelms the police and court system.
__________________
The Rifle on the Wall "“[S]cientific proof” of both gun-rights and gun-control theories “is very hard to get”; therefore, requiring “some substantial scientific proof to show that a [firearm] law will indeed substantially reduce crime and injury” is tantamount to applying strict scrutiny to, and almost certainly will lead to invalidation of, the law." - Kamala Harris Lawyers and their Stockholm Syndrome |
#247
|
||||
|
||||
I agree that is ideal. But short of coming up with credible threats, you do not have enough no votes to make a difference.
__________________
The Rifle on the Wall "“[S]cientific proof” of both gun-rights and gun-control theories “is very hard to get”; therefore, requiring “some substantial scientific proof to show that a [firearm] law will indeed substantially reduce crime and injury” is tantamount to applying strict scrutiny to, and almost certainly will lead to invalidation of, the law." - Kamala Harris Lawyers and their Stockholm Syndrome |
#248
|
|||
|
|||
Look at all these rioters!!!
They will never be able to get a loan, job, or credit card ever again! Say it with me now "VISA over freedom. VISA over freedom. VISA over FREEDOM!"
__________________
There is no justification for the public servant police to be more heavily armed than the law-abiding public they serve...Unless...the government's intention is to be more powerful than the people. Last edited by lilro; 02-25-2013 at 5:48 PM.. |
#249
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
The lobbying and political strategizing is by far the preferred method, but the question is what happens if the super majority fails to oblige. With the push coming from the WH and the official DNC strategy including a ban on certain semi-autos, it's not imprudent to consider options further down the road. SB 249 was killed in committee, but AB 962 went to courts and earned us a PI. We have to take what's available to us.
__________________
NRA Benefactor Member |
#250
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
That a new registration, vast and immense, would in fact become legal documentation of (AR type) Semi-Auto rifles as in-arguably "in common use." A.W.D. eta: Yeah, OK - maybe I'm late
__________________
Quote:
|
#251
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
These bills have not even gotten out of the chute yet. Press the politicians now support gun rights with donations. If the bill passes you call the Governor for a veto. Making noise at this stage of the game is important. Tie up their staff so much that nothing else gets done in their office. If all else fails it will go to court, Due diligence along the way is still important. |
#252
|
||||
|
||||
I don't see anybody ignoring unconstitutional laws there. You did say that is what will magically change the laws, right? You know, without the courts or legislators being involved?
__________________
The Rifle on the Wall "“[S]cientific proof” of both gun-rights and gun-control theories “is very hard to get”; therefore, requiring “some substantial scientific proof to show that a [firearm] law will indeed substantially reduce crime and injury” is tantamount to applying strict scrutiny to, and almost certainly will lead to invalidation of, the law." - Kamala Harris Lawyers and their Stockholm Syndrome Last edited by curtisfong; 02-25-2013 at 5:51 PM.. |
#253
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
The Rifle on the Wall "“[S]cientific proof” of both gun-rights and gun-control theories “is very hard to get”; therefore, requiring “some substantial scientific proof to show that a [firearm] law will indeed substantially reduce crime and injury” is tantamount to applying strict scrutiny to, and almost certainly will lead to invalidation of, the law." - Kamala Harris Lawyers and their Stockholm Syndrome |
#254
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
There is no justification for the public servant police to be more heavily armed than the law-abiding public they serve...Unless...the government's intention is to be more powerful than the people. Last edited by lilro; 02-25-2013 at 5:53 PM.. |
#255
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
I wouldn't mind him saying that if the bill gets close to becoming actual law. Just not at this stage of the game. |
#256
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Unless your threat is credible, what is the point to saying you will not comply? How does an empty threat change the landscape? What pressure does that put on the legislature?
__________________
The Rifle on the Wall "“[S]cientific proof” of both gun-rights and gun-control theories “is very hard to get”; therefore, requiring “some substantial scientific proof to show that a [firearm] law will indeed substantially reduce crime and injury” is tantamount to applying strict scrutiny to, and almost certainly will lead to invalidation of, the law." - Kamala Harris Lawyers and their Stockholm Syndrome |
#257
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
1) I am not Gene, nor do I speak for Gene 2) I do not want SB 374 to pass
__________________
The Rifle on the Wall "“[S]cientific proof” of both gun-rights and gun-control theories “is very hard to get”; therefore, requiring “some substantial scientific proof to show that a [firearm] law will indeed substantially reduce crime and injury” is tantamount to applying strict scrutiny to, and almost certainly will lead to invalidation of, the law." - Kamala Harris Lawyers and their Stockholm Syndrome |
#258
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
But if that was the intent, take a look at the liberal's fight with marijuana. They do it anyway. And look at how the state has changed. It went from completely illegal, to medically legal, to possession of less than an oz being a traffic ticket. The liberal methods seem to be the most effective in this state. Take a page from their playbook.
__________________
There is no justification for the public servant police to be more heavily armed than the law-abiding public they serve...Unless...the government's intention is to be more powerful than the people. Last edited by lilro; 02-25-2013 at 6:01 PM.. |
#259
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Part of pushing the legislators is also opening their eyes to the "unintended consequences" and the battles they'll be facing.
__________________
NRA Benefactor Member |
#260
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
They are certainly not afraid of the CGF threats of law suits yet. |
#261
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
If if it were that easy, we'd see massive deregulation of all drugs.
__________________
The Rifle on the Wall "“[S]cientific proof” of both gun-rights and gun-control theories “is very hard to get”; therefore, requiring “some substantial scientific proof to show that a [firearm] law will indeed substantially reduce crime and injury” is tantamount to applying strict scrutiny to, and almost certainly will lead to invalidation of, the law." - Kamala Harris Lawyers and their Stockholm Syndrome |
#262
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
There is no justification for the public servant police to be more heavily armed than the law-abiding public they serve...Unless...the government's intention is to be more powerful than the people. |
#263
|
||||
|
||||
Great stated goal; just saying that your advice to break the law does not advance that goal.
__________________
The Rifle on the Wall "“[S]cientific proof” of both gun-rights and gun-control theories “is very hard to get”; therefore, requiring “some substantial scientific proof to show that a [firearm] law will indeed substantially reduce crime and injury” is tantamount to applying strict scrutiny to, and almost certainly will lead to invalidation of, the law." - Kamala Harris Lawyers and their Stockholm Syndrome |
#264
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#265
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
CGF is not the only game in town. It's the risk/benefit analysis in general that should give the legislators pause. BTW, I believe we are all on the same page when it comes to order of things: work the legislators first, everything else later. There are many ways to keep pressure on legislators and they are not mutually exclusive.
__________________
NRA Benefactor Member |
#266
|
|||
|
|||
Under the Bill Felons will be excempt from registration
HAYNES v. UNITED STATES, 390 U.S. 85 (1968)
Petitioner was charged by information with violating 26 U.S.C. 5851 (part of the National Firearms Act, an interrelated statutory system for the taxation of certain classes of firearms used principally by persons engaged in unlawful activities) by knowingly possessing a defined firearm which had not been registered as required by 26 U.S.C. 5841. Section 5841 obligates the possessor of a defined firearm to register the weapon, unless he made it or acquired it by transfer or importation, and the Act's requirements as to transfers, makings and importations "were complied with." Section 5851 declares unlawful the possession of such firearm which has "at any time" been transferred or made in violation of the Act, or which "has not been registered as required by section 5841." Additionally, 5851 provides that "possession shall be deemed sufficient evidence to authorize conviction, unless the defendant explains such possession to the satisfaction of the jury." Petitioner moved before trial to dismiss the charge, sufficiently asserting that 5851 violated his privilege against self-incrimination guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment. The motion was denied, petitioner pleaded guilty, and his conviction was affirmed by the Court of Appeals. Held: 3. A proper claim of the privilege against self-incrimination provides a full defense to prosecutions either for failure to register under 5841 or for possession of an unregistered firearm under 5851. Pp. 95-100. And by an 8-1 decision the Supreme Court agreed with Haynes that expecting him to register his short barreled shotgun when he was a convicted felon effectively violated his 5th Amendment rights against self-incrimination. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
#267
|
||||
|
||||
Ugh. All the more reason I regret getting sucked into the stupid flamewars in this thread. I should know better but I have a severe flaw in my character.
__________________
The Rifle on the Wall "“[S]cientific proof” of both gun-rights and gun-control theories “is very hard to get”; therefore, requiring “some substantial scientific proof to show that a [firearm] law will indeed substantially reduce crime and injury” is tantamount to applying strict scrutiny to, and almost certainly will lead to invalidation of, the law." - Kamala Harris Lawyers and their Stockholm Syndrome |
#268
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
You do realize that there are at least 45 bills and 2 resos in play at present; if this is what "confusing them just fine" looks like... -Brandon
__________________
Brandon Combs I do not read private messages, and my inbox is usually full. If you need to reach me, please email me instead. My comments are not the official position or a statement of any organization unless stated otherwise. My comments are not legal advice; if you want or need legal advice, hire a lawyer. |
#269
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
I'm also saying that it takes movements like "no on SB249" to help defeat many of these bills. What i am also saying is that Gene (one man) posting here is not going to be a game changer with all the bills being proposed. |
#270
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Quote:
-Gene
__________________
Gene Hoffman Chairman, California Gun Rights Foundation DONATE NOW to support the rights of California gun owners. Follow @cgfgunrights on Twitter. Opinions posted in this account are my own and not the approved position of any organization. I read PMs. But, if you need a response, include an email address or email me directly! "The problem with being a gun rights supporter is that the left hates guns and the right hates rights." -Anon
|
#271
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Stop SB 249 wasn't run by lobbyists. Gene's letter to the Legislature last year became one member's talking points. Mine was in the committee analysis that killed the bill. But hey, what do we know? -Brandon
__________________
Brandon Combs I do not read private messages, and my inbox is usually full. If you need to reach me, please email me instead. My comments are not the official position or a statement of any organization unless stated otherwise. My comments are not legal advice; if you want or need legal advice, hire a lawyer. |
#272
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
I had an OLL AR before you were even registered on this site. YOU did not invent the mag release/lock. You are taking credit for things you did not do. Now with that said i will say you have been very good at talking and you can represent gun owners pretty well. However as you interviewer on KGO radio pointed out, "you are not a gunnie" You concurred and told him you are in fact a "techie" Perhaps you would connect with gun owners better IF you better understood the culture. Including hunting. |
#273
|
||||
|
||||
Secondary compared with connecting with non-gun owners.
__________________
The Rifle on the Wall "“[S]cientific proof” of both gun-rights and gun-control theories “is very hard to get”; therefore, requiring “some substantial scientific proof to show that a [firearm] law will indeed substantially reduce crime and injury” is tantamount to applying strict scrutiny to, and almost certainly will lead to invalidation of, the law." - Kamala Harris Lawyers and their Stockholm Syndrome |
#274
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
I simply disagreed with Genes post and once again, feathers fly from all directions from other posters. |
#275
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
So to sum up: You didn't import the first off list ARs, you didn't design the Prince-50 or the BB, you didn't go to jail over an OLL, and you didn't have a thing to do with Harrott. Yet now you want to take full credit for every BB rifle in the state? Sad. You are a footnote at best. As for Sacramento, since you claim it as a victory based on your suit, did you get a binding settlement agreement from them? You know something that would stop them from reversing their policy again whenever they feel like it and revoking all those permits? You know, like when another Sheriff comes in and resets policy. As in exactly what happened to cause these issuances you are trying to take credit for? If not, why did you drop your suit? I'm sure you guys did more than the two full time lobbyists, by writing letters. |
#276
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
-Brandon
__________________
Brandon Combs I do not read private messages, and my inbox is usually full. If you need to reach me, please email me instead. My comments are not the official position or a statement of any organization unless stated otherwise. My comments are not legal advice; if you want or need legal advice, hire a lawyer. |
#277
|
|||
|
|||
This is what i would like to see happen with this bill and others. My only case and point. Not to tell others here how fun it would be to register everyones firearms.
|
#278
|
||||
|
||||
Sometimes rushing about trying to grab all the attention you can, and putting your name on as many things as possible, isn't the best strategy. I would not expect you to understand that.
|
#279
|
||||
|
||||
Some members need to be reminded that the discussions here are about the issues, not about the personalities.
Stay on topic, please.
__________________
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. |
#280
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
-Brandon
__________________
Brandon Combs I do not read private messages, and my inbox is usually full. If you need to reach me, please email me instead. My comments are not the official position or a statement of any organization unless stated otherwise. My comments are not legal advice; if you want or need legal advice, hire a lawyer. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|