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
  #121  
Old 06-19-2017, 8:03 AM
TurboChrisB's Avatar
TurboChrisB TurboChrisB is online now
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Costa Mesa
Posts: 4,214
iTrader: 69 / 100%
Default

sigh
Reply With Quote
  #122  
Old 06-19-2017, 8:45 AM
surfgeorge surfgeorge is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 512
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Just as a reminder, Peruta filed his lawsuit on October 23, 2009. Good thing 8 years (okay, 7 years, 8 months, so far) isn't considered a "delay", otherwise some might consider that "justice denied". I guess the rebuttal to that is "We (the "justice system") told him "NO!" at every level (Okay, some aberrant three-judge panel at the Ninth momentarily made an error which was immediately corrected). It's his fault he kept asking the courts to change their mind and rule that "bear arms" means "bear arms"".
Reply With Quote
  #123  
Old 06-19-2017, 8:45 AM
splithoof splithoof is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 973
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

This is certainly turning into a marathon case. I am starting to think that the justices are preparing for some political firestorm, and want to release their latest decision on their way out the door before recess. Kind of like dropping your grade school homework in the bin at the sound of the dismissal bell.
I wonder to what degree, if any, they are also looking at other related cases, in a possible effort to bolster their position. I know we have all grown impatient with the court's delays, but at this point I'm curious as to see how long it can be stretched out. I'll plant corn in my garden for eventual popping.
Reply With Quote
  #124  
Old 06-19-2017, 9:36 AM
BAJ475's Avatar
BAJ475 BAJ475 is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Butte County, California
Posts: 1,549
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lorax3 View Post
Monday orders are out: no action on Peruta.
What happens if they fail to take action before the end of the term?
Reply With Quote
  #125  
Old 06-19-2017, 10:27 AM
lowimpactuser lowimpactuser is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,789
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phiremin View Post
That must be some dissent Thomas is writing.
Wonder if he'll finish it before the session ends
I just want him to name names.
__________________
KnifeRights.org/images/KRbanner_468x60-1.gif
Reply With Quote
  #126  
Old 06-19-2017, 10:35 AM
Southwest Chuck Southwest Chuck is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: San Bernardino County
Posts: 1,951
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BAJ475 View Post
What happens if they fail to take action before the end of the term?
I believe (and my understanding) is that it automatically gets carried over to the fall term. Maybe the Long Conference? Others may know for sure, and will chime in I'm sure .... Anyway you want to cut it, it's still a "wait and see"... If it does, I see that as a good sign for us ....
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Southwest Chuck View Post
I am humbled at the efforts of so many Patriots on this and other forums, CGN, CGF, SAF, NRA, CRPF, MDS etc. etc. I am lucky to be living in an era of a new awakening of the American Spirit; One that embraces it's Constitutional History, and it's Founding Fathers vision, especially in an age of such uncertainty that we are now in.
Quote:
Originally Posted by toby View Post
Go cheap you will always have cheap and if you sell, it will sell for even cheaper. Buy the best you can every time.
^^^ Wise Man. Take his advice

Last edited by Southwest Chuck; 06-19-2017 at 10:37 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #127  
Old 06-19-2017, 10:40 AM
Markinsac Markinsac is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 701
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lorax3 View Post
Monday orders are out: no action on Peruta.
Actually, it has been distributed again for this week's conference on 6/22
Reply With Quote
  #128  
Old 06-19-2017, 1:12 PM
Crazydave's Avatar
Crazydave Crazydave is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 295
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazydave View Post
Are we literally two weeks out?

Remaining Conference Dates this session:
May 25
June 1
June 8
June 15
June 22

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
Quote:
Originally Posted by Markinsac View Post
Actually, it has been distributed again for this week's conference on 6/22
Last session of the term...
Reply With Quote
  #129  
Old 06-19-2017, 1:23 PM
The Tiger's Avatar
The Tiger The Tiger is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Mordor aka Los Angeles
Posts: 1,201
iTrader: 11 / 100%
Default

Longest two weeks ever
__________________

NRA Benefactor
CRPA Life Member
Reply With Quote
  #130  
Old 06-19-2017, 1:51 PM
SimpleCountryActuary's Avatar
SimpleCountryActuary SimpleCountryActuary is offline
Not a miracle worker
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,955
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Tiger View Post
Longest two weeks ever
As long as Groundhog Day? Have the Supreme Court Justices learned how to toss cards into a hat? I don't think so.
__________________
"The most hated initials in America today ... TSA."

Said by yours truly to an audience of nodding IRS employees.
Reply With Quote
  #131  
Old 06-19-2017, 3:30 PM
lowimpactuser lowimpactuser is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,789
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Any Kcbrown "all is lost" converts from the last few months? Would love to hear what in the last few months made you lose hope and embrace the revelation of the prophet Kcbrown.

The rescheduling?
The second relist?
Third?
Fourth?

I want to hear your story!
__________________
KnifeRights.org/images/KRbanner_468x60-1.gif
Reply With Quote
  #132  
Old 06-19-2017, 3:46 PM
mrrabbit mrrabbit is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Northern California
Posts: 2,842
iTrader: 13 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by butchy_boy View Post
We wouldn't be fighting a decade later if Heller defined them. Best result if Peruta is we move forward in defining bear.
Heller did...

Several states, the Uniparty, and the NRA, SAF, GOA and CRPA didn't like the decision...and keep pushing back.

Read
The
Actual
Decision

=8-|
Reply With Quote
  #133  
Old 06-19-2017, 8:22 PM
thorium thorium is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: OC
Posts: 702
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

If they don't do "something" next week, and let it carry over to the fall term, then the odds that Norman is the cause of that rise dramatically.
__________________
-------------------------
Reply With Quote
  #134  
Old 06-19-2017, 9:16 PM
Blackhawk556's Avatar
Blackhawk556 Blackhawk556 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: FresNO, Ca
Posts: 3,762
iTrader: 16 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thorium View Post
If they don't do "something" next week, and let it carry over to the fall term, then the odds that Norman is the cause of that rise dramatically.
If they keep pushing it back in the fall like they are right now and don't deny, does it automatically die? Or are they forced to accept /deny in the fall?

Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk
__________________
CZ 75 SP-01 ROCKS!
"If guns kill people, do pencils misspell words?"
Reply With Quote
  #135  
Old 06-20-2017, 12:56 AM
mrrabbit mrrabbit is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Northern California
Posts: 2,842
iTrader: 13 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phiremin View Post
That must be some dissent Thomas is writing.
Wonder if he'll finish it before the session ends
As I've asked a couple other posters making the same comment:

"Why would Thomas be writing a dissent?"

=8-)
Reply With Quote
  #136  
Old 06-20-2017, 8:41 AM
SPGuy SPGuy is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 111
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrrabbit View Post
As I've asked a couple other posters making the same comment:

"Why would Thomas be writing a dissent?"

=8-)
Yeah it's Ginsburg writing the dessent on why it shouldn't be heard!!

Hey wishful thinking doesn't hurt anyone

Last edited by SPGuy; 06-20-2017 at 8:44 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #137  
Old 06-20-2017, 8:54 AM
surfgeorge surfgeorge is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 512
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SPGuy View Post
Hey wishful thinking doesn't hurt anyone
I beg to differ. That's (or another term I won't be so "mean" as to write) exactly how we got where we are today with Peruta.
Reply With Quote
  #138  
Old 06-20-2017, 9:48 AM
SPGuy SPGuy is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 111
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by surfgeorge View Post
I beg to differ. That's (or another term I won't be so "mean" as to write) exactly how we got where we are today with Peruta.
Your comment is just asinine. How does me day dreaming hoping and praying really affect anyone or anything? How we got into this mess was inactivity in local and federal politics as well as getting outnumbered. Do I know that in all likelihood it will be denied? Yes. Do I go out and vote for my second amendment and for those who would help it? Yes. Do I lose every single time because I live in Los Angeles? Yes. Do I write to all of "my" representives? Yes. Do I get the same blowoff response every time? Yes. But if I can't hope or day dream life just sucks and is boring. There should always be hope and whimsy in life or it's just a sad life.

Just because you hope or think positive doesn't mean you can't also take action to try to make it happen. Maybe what you meant is inactivity is how we got here.

Last edited by SPGuy; 06-20-2017 at 10:09 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #139  
Old 06-20-2017, 9:52 AM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Not a mod or lawyer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 12,242
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by surfgeorge View Post
I beg to differ. That's (or another term I won't be so "mean" as to write) exactly how we got where we are today with Peruta.
Wishful thinking by anonymous users on an internet forum is how we got where we are today with Peruta?
Reply With Quote
  #140  
Old 06-20-2017, 10:18 AM
surfgeorge surfgeorge is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 512
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SPGuy View Post
How does me day dreaming hoping and praying really affect anyone or anything? How we got into this mess was inactivity in local and federal politics as well as getting outnumbered. Do I know that in all likelihood it will be denied? Yes. Do I go out and vote for my second amendment and for those who would help it? Yes. Do I lose every single time because I live in Los Angeles? Yes. Do I write to all of "my" representives? Yes. Do I get the same blowoff response every time? Yes. But if I can't hope or day dream life just sucks and is boring. There should always be hope and whimsy in life or it's just a sad life.

Just because you hope or think positive doesn't mean you can't also take action to try to make it happen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cockedandglocked View Post
Wishful thinking by anonymous users on an internet forum is how we got where we are today with Peruta?
I was referring to the "legal strategy" adopted by the litigation team for Peruta. I'm apparently not allowed to express "harsh" opinions about that strategy as it is deemed "off topic" or for some other reason deleted by a moderator, so I didn't write explicitly what I think that is, rather, that I see it as a version of "wishful thinking", which, thus far, has been what we see: FAIL.

Perhaps next Monday (after nearly 8 years and who-knows how much money) the results thus far will be reversed and the strategy will be proven a success. Otherwise we'll have to wait for another case to make it's way to SCOTUS and see if the strategy for that case is based on less "wishful thinking" and a more sound legal framework (i.e. one that five members of SCOTUS agree with. And I'll admit that it's possible that there is no such strategy or reasoning that five members of SCOTUS will support regarding the right to bear arms outside the home.).

Also, note that the Richards/Gura/SAF team declined to participate in the request for cert to SCOTUS. I don't know what their reasoning was for that decision, but it's possible that "wishful thinking" was not involved.
Reply With Quote
  #141  
Old 06-20-2017, 10:30 AM
wolfwood's Avatar
wolfwood wolfwood is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: San Diego
Posts: 867
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by surfgeorge View Post
I was referring to the "legal strategy" adopted by the litigation team for Peruta. I'm apparently not allowed to express "harsh" opinions about that strategy as it is deemed "off topic" or for some other reason deleted by a moderator, so I didn't write explicitly what I think that is, rather, that I see it as a version of "wishful thinking", which, thus far, has been what we see: FAIL.

Perhaps next Monday (after nearly 8 years and who-knows how much money) the results thus far will be reversed and the strategy will be proven a success. Otherwise we'll have to wait for another case to make it's way to SCOTUS and see if the strategy for that case is based on less "wishful thinking" and a more sound legal framework (i.e. one that five members of SCOTUS agree with. And I'll admit that it's possible that there is no such strategy or reasoning that five members of SCOTUS will support regarding the right to bear arms outside the home.).

Also, note that the Richards/Gura/SAF team declined to participate in the request for cert to SCOTUS. I don't know what their reasoning was for that decision, but it's possible that "wishful thinking" was not involved.
No offense but unless you have given money to the Peruta case you don't really have any right to criticize it or the legal strategy used to ligate it . I hear a lot of Monday morning quarterbacking by people who have no investment in these cases.
Reply With Quote
  #142  
Old 06-20-2017, 1:09 PM
surfgeorge surfgeorge is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 512
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfwood View Post
No offense but unless you have given money to the Peruta case you don't really have any right to criticize it or the legal strategy used to ligate it . I hear a lot of Monday morning quarterbacking by people who have no investment in these cases.
I had no idea that any "right" I had to comment (or is it just "criticize"?) on anything was dependent upon my giving money to people. That's good to know. And coming from a lawyer, I know it must be correct.

This is one of those comments that will no doubt be deleted by the mod(s). Maybe if I gave them money?
Reply With Quote
  #143  
Old 06-20-2017, 3:07 PM
kcbrown's Avatar
kcbrown kcbrown is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 8,298
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfwood View Post
No offense but unless you have given money to the Peruta case you don't really have any right to criticize it or the legal strategy used to ligate it . I hear a lot of Monday morning quarterbacking by people who have no investment in these cases.
The very rights of the people in question hang in the balance in these cases. Of course they have a right to criticize them, because they will be affected greatly by these cases.

As for a financial investment, that is automatically in play on the part of anyone and everyone who has contributed to CRPA.
__________________
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.

Last edited by kcbrown; 06-20-2017 at 3:09 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #144  
Old 06-20-2017, 3:50 PM
press1280 press1280 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: WV
Posts: 2,208
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

[QUOTE=surfgeorge;20260486]I was referring to the "legal strategy" adopted by the litigation team for Peruta. I'm apparently not allowed to express "harsh" opinions about that strategy as it is deemed "off topic" or for some other reason deleted by a moderator, so I didn't write explicitly what I think that is, rather, that I see it as a version of "wishful thinking", which, thus far, has been what we see: FAIL.

Perhaps next Monday (after nearly 8 years and who-knows how much money) the results thus far will be reversed and the strategy will be proven a success. Otherwise we'll have to wait for another case to make it's way to SCOTUS and see if the strategy for that case is based on less "wishful thinking" and a more sound legal framework (i.e. one that five members of SCOTUS agree with. And I'll admit that it's possible that there is no such strategy or reasoning that five members of SCOTUS will support regarding the right to bear arms outside the home.).

Also, note that the Richards/Gura/SAF team declined to participate in the request for cert to SCOTUS. I don't know what their reasoning was for that decision, but it's possible that "wishful thinking" was not involved.[/QUOTE]

Not sure, and a bit disturbing. SAF has seemingly pulled back on lawsuits, perhaps all the losses have taken their toll and they don't have resources like the NRA does.
Reply With Quote
  #145  
Old 06-20-2017, 7:10 PM
wolfwood's Avatar
wolfwood wolfwood is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: San Diego
Posts: 867
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kcbrown View Post
The very rights of the people in question hang in the balance in these cases. Of course they have a right to criticize them, because they will be affected greatly by these cases.

As for a financial investment, that is automatically in play on the part of anyone and everyone who has contributed to CRPA.
Sure but I doubt a guy from Hawaii is actively donating to CRPA.

I personally donate to GOA because that is the organization that is best aligned with my world view. Larry Pratt personally responds to my emails or his son because I am a paying member. Why because I have a stake in GOA's future. I would not feel comfortable doing the same with CRPA because I am not a member.
Reply With Quote
  #146  
Old 06-20-2017, 7:30 PM
wolfwood's Avatar
wolfwood wolfwood is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: San Diego
Posts: 867
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by press1280 View Post

Not sure, and a bit disturbing. SAF has seemingly pulled back on lawsuits, perhaps all the losses have taken their toll and they don't have resources like the NRA does.
I was surprised they were not interested in my taser lawsuits. Between me and Arsenal Arms we swept the east coast. I don't get why SAF did not want those cases.
Reply With Quote
  #147  
Old 06-20-2017, 8:05 PM
surfgeorge surfgeorge is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 512
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfwood View Post
I was surprised they were not interested in my taser lawsuits. Between me and Arsenal Arms we swept the east coast. I don't get why SAF did not want those cases.
["Larry Pratt personally responds to my emails or his son because I am a paying member."]
What did Larry and/or Erich tell you when they wrote you back?

Also, what level of donation would I have to make to which organization(s) in order to be allowed to comment, question, or "criticize" the legal strategies adopted by those organizations?

Say, for instance, I donated $1 (one dollar) to CRPA. What would I be allowed to say?
Reply With Quote
  #148  
Old 06-20-2017, 8:26 PM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Not a mod or lawyer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 12,242
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by surfgeorge View Post
Say, for instance, I donated $1 (one dollar) to CRPA. What would I be allowed to say?
"Don't spend it all at once"
Reply With Quote
  #149  
Old 06-21-2017, 11:39 AM
kcbrown's Avatar
kcbrown kcbrown is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 8,298
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfwood View Post
Sure but I doubt a guy from Hawaii is actively donating to CRPA.
If NRA is helping to bankroll the case then donations to the NRA count too.






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
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
  #150  
Old 06-21-2017, 2:46 PM
Diamondi88 Diamondi88 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Wildomar
Posts: 69
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

So this is a pay to play thread now?


I feel I can ask this because I have contributed to NRA, NRA-ILA and CRPA.

Back on topic. I have yet to make my prediction on how this will go. Without pointing to any single source but a collection of everything I have read on this case.

I feel this case will be granted cert. I think there is a judge on the fence and needs more time to think and research the question before fully committing to the granting of cert. The question of the right to bear arms outside the home in some manner is fundamental to our freedom and the 2nd Amendment. SCOTUS not answering this question would be a travesty to our freedoms under the Bill of Rights.

Is this the right case at the right time? Who knows. All I know is it is the case we have right now before the courts and the one that needs supporting at this time. Norman or Grace may or may not have their time in the future. But this one is now.

This is just my wild guess and carries no more weight then anyone else's wild guess.


Reply With Quote
  #151  
Old 06-21-2017, 3:17 PM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Not a mod or lawyer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 12,242
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diamondi88 View Post
This is just my wild guess and carries no more weight then anyone else's wild guess.
That puts you in the minority, for sure, but that's what I'm guessing too. I'm confident enough that I'm willing to risk donating $100 to Lorax's shelter for neglected hermit crabs charity (or whatever) if I'm wrong
Reply With Quote
  #152  
Old 06-21-2017, 3:58 PM
canopis's Avatar
canopis canopis is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 235
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diamondi88 View Post
I feel this case will be granted cert. I think there is a judge on the fence and needs more time to think and research the question before fully committing to the granting of cert.
...
This is just my wild guess and carries no more weight then anyone else's wild guess.
Here is my wild guess:

I think there are probably enough votes to grant cert (only 4 are needed). But I think that the justices who want to grant cert are not sure that there is a fifth vote to get to a majority once the case is heard. Imagine if the Court takes Peruta and then affirms the en banc Ninth Circuit. That's probably worse than refusing to hear the case.
Reply With Quote
  #153  
Old 06-21-2017, 5:04 PM
BAJ475's Avatar
BAJ475 BAJ475 is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Butte County, California
Posts: 1,549
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by canopis View Post
Here is my wild guess:

I think there are probably enough votes to grant cert (only 4 are needed). But I think that the justices who want to grant cert are not sure that there is a fifth vote to get to a majority once the case is heard. Imagine if the Court takes Peruta and then affirms the en banc Ninth Circuit. That's probably worse than refusing to hear the case.
Exactly! While we would like the court to grant cert and overturn the en banc panel and put an end to the purported intermediate scrutinty BS, a 5/4 affirmance would be a total disaster for the 2A and the country.
Reply With Quote
  #154  
Old 06-22-2017, 3:42 AM
Baja Daze Baja Daze is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Peoples Democratic Republik of Kaliforniastan
Posts: 690
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by canopis View Post
Here is my wild guess:

I think there are probably enough votes to grant cert (only 4 are needed). But I think that the justices who want to grant cert are not sure that there is a fifth vote to get to a majority once the case is heard. Imagine if the Court takes Peruta and then affirms the en banc Ninth Circuit. That's probably worse than refusing to hear the case.
And BINGO! We have a winner....
Reply With Quote
  #155  
Old 06-22-2017, 7:17 AM
mrrabbit mrrabbit is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Northern California
Posts: 2,842
iTrader: 13 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Baja Daze View Post
And BINGO! We have a winner....
Affirming Heller v. DC

For that particular, how would that be worse?

=8-)
Reply With Quote
  #156  
Old 06-22-2017, 8:49 AM
surfgeorge surfgeorge is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 512
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrrabbit View Post
Affirming Heller v. DC

For that particular, how would that be worse?

=8-)
I'm pretty sure there is no point, in this late date, in asking the individuals, "gun rights" organizations, and their legal teams to give up on the quest for the Constitutional argument for concealed carry. They'll likely go to their graves insisting on it and continuing to claim that Heller, etc., state that the state can ban open carry in favor of concealed carry.

I suppose I should mention that given the "fluidity" of the courts these days that it's quite possible they could manufacture just such an opinion, however, banking on that as a legal strategy might not have been the wisest course.

But since I haven't invested financially (or invested enough, or something) in any of those cases, I'm not allowed to make such comments, so please disregard them.
Reply With Quote
  #157  
Old 06-22-2017, 12:40 PM
CCWFacts CCWFacts is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 5,612
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by canopis View Post
Here is my wild guess:

I think there are probably enough votes to grant cert (only 4 are needed). But I think that the justices who want to grant cert are not sure that there is a fifth vote to get to a majority once the case is heard. Imagine if the Court takes Peruta and then affirms the en banc Ninth Circuit. That's probably worse than refusing to hear the case.
Sure, clearly that's what's happening. This isn't a patent dispute between Apple and Samsung, that none of the judges have any personal feelings over it and they don't especially care about the outcome. No, this is something that everyone has personal feelings about, they all care about the outcome, more so than probably any other case that's asking for cert. So they're not going to grant cert without knowing what the outcome will be.

Conversely, if there were 5 solid liberals I'm also sure they would grant cert and delete "bear" from the BoR.
__________________
I will spit whenever I hear the word Libertarian from now on.

In the 2016 election, Libertarian voters threw the swing states of Nevada, Colorado, New Mexico, Minnesota, New Hampshire, and Maine to Hillary, for a total of 38 electoral college votes. Hillary would have created a permanent a permanent entitlement class and permanent Democratic control over the US.
Reply With Quote
  #158  
Old 06-22-2017, 2:58 PM
Drivedabizness's Avatar
Drivedabizness Drivedabizness is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Folsom, CA
Posts: 1,919
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Folks this all points to the need for a Legislative codification of Heller (no more 2A 2-step). Needs to address sales rationing/over regulation (arms, ammo, accessories) use of registration for confiscation, "features" and "less than standard" capacity limits, and a regime for "bear" outside the home. Some tweaks to NFA, GCA and Hughes Amendment would be good too. We also need to re-iterate Heller as the 9CA seems to think laws forcing people to disable their handguns in the home are somehow OK.
Since we have SCOTUS precedent allowing concealed bans when open is available, the language should clarify that if you ban concealed, LOC MUST be available. We know from experience what will happen (see Ohio where they went shall issue to avoid LOC).
On another front, as part of their regulatory power over the Courts, we need language defining "good behavior" for lifetime appointment Federal judges. Justice Sotomayors vow to uphold Heller under stare' decisis as "settled law" at her confirmation, followed by her refusal to apply Heller to the States/local government looks very much to me like she lied to Congress (a crime to gain confirmation. IANAL but I'd like to see some tightening on the obvious games - the 9CA ignores rules all the time.
__________________
Proud CGN Contributor
USMC Pistol Team Alumni - Distinguished Pistol Shot
Owner of multiple Constitutionally protected tools
Reply With Quote
  #159  
Old 06-23-2017, 4:39 AM
Baja Daze Baja Daze is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Peoples Democratic Republik of Kaliforniastan
Posts: 690
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrrabbit View Post
Affirming Heller v. DC

For that particular, how would that be worse?

=8-)
You underestimate the libtards on SCOTUS....

We could get Cert granted and a subsequent loss stating that there is absolutely NO right to "bear" arms beyond our homes period!

Even if SCOTUS silently agrees that "open carry" is the right and "bear" extends beyond the home, I suspect some Justices simply can't cope with the image of Americans open carrying in say mid-town Manhattan, around D.C., etc. and deny the right while silently knowing they are wrong.
Reply With Quote
  #160  
Old 06-23-2017, 5:05 AM
Southwest Chuck Southwest Chuck is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: San Bernardino County
Posts: 1,951
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Baja Daze View Post
You underestimate the libtards on SCOTUS....

We could get Cert granted and a subsequent loss stating that there is absolutely NO right to "bear" arms beyond our homes period!

Even if SCOTUS silently agrees that "open carry" is the right and "bear" extends beyond the home, I suspect some Justices simply can't cope with the image of Americans open carrying in say mid-town Manhattan, around D.C., etc. and deny the right while silently knowing they are wrong.
That would only hasten the Convention of States Project and put a fire under it. I would prefer we push the envelop on the issue. Make'em ban bear if they got the balls ...... I'm pretty sure Gingsburg and that wise Latina have a set .... I don't think Kennedy has the 'nads to go that far though
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Southwest Chuck View Post
I am humbled at the efforts of so many Patriots on this and other forums, CGN, CGF, SAF, NRA, CRPF, MDS etc. etc. I am lucky to be living in an era of a new awakening of the American Spirit; One that embraces it's Constitutional History, and it's Founding Fathers vision, especially in an age of such uncertainty that we are now in.
Quote:
Originally Posted by toby View Post
Go cheap you will always have cheap and if you sell, it will sell for even cheaper. Buy the best you can every time.
^^^ Wise Man. Take his advice
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 10:32 PM.




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.