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
  #241  
Old 06-26-2017, 9:34 AM
Coolguy101 Coolguy101 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 251
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

This is not unexpected. The courts have followed what social issues tend to be popular in culture, and is hesitant to go against the current trend. Think LGBTQ rights as an example.

They know that eventually guns will be banned, and they are hesitant to do anything that will absolutely prevent that from happening in the future. They regret Heller, so they are doing everything they can to make that decision irrelevant.

Wake up people - times are a changing, and there is nothing you can do to stop it. When the millenials take over, that will be the end of freedom as we know it.
Reply With Quote
  #242  
Old 06-26-2017, 9:36 AM
aBrowningfan aBrowningfan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 512
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyron View Post
Hard to believe that the nine SCOTUS justices can't discuss or decide on any issue before them, since they are to sworn to judge based upon the facts applied by law and not personal opinions or political views being such.
Oh, they decided. There is just a virulent case of oath amnesia afflicting them.
Reply With Quote
  #243  
Old 06-26-2017, 9:37 AM
IVC's Avatar
IVC IVC is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Temecula
Posts: 12,674
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Tiger View Post
4 and four are the same number
Misunderstanding - I was referring to why it doesn't make sense to push for the granting of cert if there is no majority to support the decision.

Indeed it takes only 4 (sic) justices to grant the cert, but it would be counterproductive if they pushed for the cert only to get a negative decision because Kennedy, in retaliation, decides to side with the leftists.
__________________
NRA Benefactor Member
Reply With Quote
  #244  
Old 06-26-2017, 9:42 AM
CommieforniaResident CommieforniaResident is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 21
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sfpcservice View Post
The dissent clearly indicates to Me they have their eye on a different, possibly cleaner case.
From the dissent: "We should have granted certiorari in this case. The approach taken by the en banc court is indefensible, and the petition raises important questions that this Court should address. I see no reason to await another case."
Reply With Quote
  #245  
Old 06-26-2017, 9:42 AM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Not a mod or lawyer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 12,240
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by digger2 View Post
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017...ts-appeal.html Justices Thomas, Gorsuch blast court decision to reject gun rights appeal
fixed broken link
Reply With Quote
  #246  
Old 06-26-2017, 9:43 AM
aBrowningfan aBrowningfan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 512
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IVC View Post
Indeed it takes only 4 (sic) justices to grant the cert, but it would be counterproductive if they pushed for the cert only to get a negative decision because Kennedy, in retaliation, decides to side with the leftists.
I think there is more than Kennedy at work. Roberts is probably squishy as well.

Anyhows, parlor games to the contrary, Kennedy is not displaying signs of an impending retirement (he hired his full complement of clerks for next term).

Net takeaway: 2A is a states rights issue. As in those states that want to be shall issue are free to do so and those states that won't issue are likewise free to do so.
Reply With Quote
  #247  
Old 06-26-2017, 9:45 AM
aBrowningfan aBrowningfan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 512
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CommieforniaResident View Post
From the dissent: "We should have granted certiorari in this case. The approach taken by the en banc court is indefensible, and the petition raises important questions that this Court should address. I see no reason to await another case."
What case will be sufficiently compelling for cert to be granted?

IMO, SCotUS is done with 2A until Kennedy retires.
Reply With Quote
  #248  
Old 06-26-2017, 9:47 AM
IVC's Avatar
IVC IVC is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Temecula
Posts: 12,674
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coolguy101 View Post
This is not unexpected. The courts have followed what social issues tend to be popular in culture, and is hesitant to go against the current trend. Think LGBTQ rights as an example.

They know that eventually guns will be banned, and they are hesitant to do anything that will absolutely prevent that from happening in the future. They regret Heller, so they are doing everything they can to make that decision irrelevant.

Wake up people - times are a changing, and there is nothing you can do to stop it. When the millenials take over, that will be the end of freedom as we know it.
You couldn't be further off.

The gun rights have been expanding for the past 30 or so years and everywhere except in the few holdout states the gun rights have never been better.

It's a matter of time before gun rights are forced on CA. There is nothing that will reverse the trend in around 40 states. Not only are they expanding their rights, but they have *state* constitutions that affirm such rights.
__________________
NRA Benefactor Member
Reply With Quote
  #249  
Old 06-26-2017, 9:49 AM
surfgeorge surfgeorge is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 512
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aBrowningfan View Post
I think there is more than Kennedy at work. Roberts is probably squishy as well.

Anyhows, parlor games to the contrary, Kennedy is not displaying signs of an impending retirement (he hired his full complement of clerks for next term).

Net takeaway: 2A is a states rights issue. As in those states that want to be shall issue are free to do so and those states that won't issue are likewise free to do so.
I think that one part of Thomas's/Gorsuch's dissent is that the states are NOT free to violate an enumerated Constitutionally-protected right. See: same sex marriage, abortion, racial segregation, etc.
Reply With Quote
  #250  
Old 06-26-2017, 9:49 AM
IVC's Avatar
IVC IVC is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Temecula
Posts: 12,674
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aBrowningfan View Post
I think there is more than Kennedy at work. Roberts is probably squishy as well.
Possibly, but as a Chief Justice he has to keep certain appearances too. He hasn't shown any hostility towards 2A and I don't blame him for not joining dissents.

We will know soon enough, when Kennedy and/or Bader-Ginsburg are replaced.
__________________
NRA Benefactor Member
Reply With Quote
  #251  
Old 06-26-2017, 9:51 AM
IVC's Avatar
IVC IVC is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Temecula
Posts: 12,674
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CZ man in LA View Post
Justice Thomas and Gorsuch dissent are good reads. Hopefully this awakens the Never Trumpers that Trump nominating Gorsuch was the best thing that could've happened to have a friend of the 2A in the bench.
+1.

The election was about replacing Scalia and it worked wonderfully, especially with the Reid's short-sighted killing of the filibuster. As we discussed earlier, the *next* justice is where the real K/O punch comes from.
__________________
NRA Benefactor Member
Reply With Quote
  #252  
Old 06-26-2017, 9:51 AM
aBrowningfan aBrowningfan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 512
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by surfgeorge View Post
I think that one part of Thomas's/Gorsuch's dissent is that the states are NOT free to violate an enumerated Constitutionally-protected right. See: same sex marriage, abortion, racial segregation, etc.
Except they weren't able to convince enough of their fellow justices of the circumstance. Kind of like one-handed clapping.
Reply With Quote
  #253  
Old 06-26-2017, 9:53 AM
John Browning's Avatar
John Browning John Browning is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Contra Costa County
Posts: 6,912
iTrader: 71 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IVC View Post
You couldn't be further off.

The gun rights have been expanding for the past 30 or so years and everywhere except in the few holdout states the gun rights have never been better.

It's a matter of time before gun rights are forced on CA. There is nothing that will reverse the trend in around 40 states. Not only are they expanding their rights, but they have *state* constitutions that affirm such rights.
Thank you for setting him straight.
__________________
Securing a safe to a Post-tension slab - DIY

HK P30SK LEM for sale, S&W 27, S&W 37, Marlin Mountie - NorCal

Quote:
Originally Posted by KWalkerM View Post
eh why bring logic into this, that makes too much sense... besides when you have bested a fool, you have accomplished nothing and he is a fool.
Reply With Quote
  #254  
Old 06-26-2017, 9:54 AM
aBrowningfan aBrowningfan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 512
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IVC View Post
It's a matter of time before gun rights are forced on CA. There is nothing that will reverse the trend in around 40 states. Not only are they expanding their rights, but they have *state* constitutions that affirm such rights.
How? Absent a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, no national CCW legislation is going to clear the Senate.
Reply With Quote
  #255  
Old 06-26-2017, 9:56 AM
John Browning's Avatar
John Browning John Browning is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Contra Costa County
Posts: 6,912
iTrader: 71 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aBrowningfan View Post
How? Absent a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, no national CCW legislation is going to clear the Senate.
It will come by way of the Supreme Court. They'll overturn good cause and AW bans. Heller pretty much spells this out. We just don't have the justices to enforce those provisions on California...yet.

Think gay marriage. It will fall the same way. National CCW reciprocity will be first via legislation.
__________________
Securing a safe to a Post-tension slab - DIY

HK P30SK LEM for sale, S&W 27, S&W 37, Marlin Mountie - NorCal

Quote:
Originally Posted by KWalkerM View Post
eh why bring logic into this, that makes too much sense... besides when you have bested a fool, you have accomplished nothing and he is a fool.
Reply With Quote
  #256  
Old 06-26-2017, 9:56 AM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Not a mod or lawyer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 12,240
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aBrowningfan View Post
How? Absent a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, no national CCW legislation is going to clear the Senate.
It will if it has a rider that also funds planned parenthood.

No liberal congressman would dare be seen voting against a bill that funds PP.

Unfortunately, likewise no conservative congressman would dare be seen authoring a bill that funds PP.

Last edited by cockedandglocked; 06-26-2017 at 10:01 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #257  
Old 06-26-2017, 9:57 AM
aBrowningfan aBrowningfan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 512
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cockedandglocked View Post
It will if it has a rider that also funds planned parenthood
That is an interesting dilemma. Although I suspect that PP would come out and say defund us.
Reply With Quote
  #258  
Old 06-26-2017, 9:59 AM
splithoof splithoof is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 880
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

At this point, what timeframe are we realistically looking at before another case that could help us comes up before SCOTUS?......I hear about other various cases, but where are they in the process, and how many years away are they?
Reply With Quote
  #259  
Old 06-26-2017, 10:01 AM
John Browning's Avatar
John Browning John Browning is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Contra Costa County
Posts: 6,912
iTrader: 71 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by splithoof View Post
At this point, what timeframe are we realistically looking at before another case that could help us comes up before SCOTUS?......I hear about other various cases, but where are they in the process, and how many years away are they?
It's more about who is on the court. RBG (and probably Kennedy) needs to disappear from the court for it to move forward.
__________________
Securing a safe to a Post-tension slab - DIY

HK P30SK LEM for sale, S&W 27, S&W 37, Marlin Mountie - NorCal

Quote:
Originally Posted by KWalkerM View Post
eh why bring logic into this, that makes too much sense... besides when you have bested a fool, you have accomplished nothing and he is a fool.
Reply With Quote
  #260  
Old 06-26-2017, 10:02 AM
aBrowningfan aBrowningfan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 512
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Browning View Post
It will come by way of the Supreme Court. They'll overturn good cause and AW bans. Heller pretty much spells this out. We just don't have the justices to enforce those provisions on California...yet.

Think gay marriage. It will fall the same way. National CCW reciprocity will be first via legislation.
I wish I were as optimistic as you are. Right now, I am sweating the impending ban on Hi-Cap magazines. After that, the ammunition restrictions that kick in Jan 1, 2018.

I now know how an orphan feels.
Reply With Quote
  #261  
Old 06-26-2017, 10:07 AM
John Browning's Avatar
John Browning John Browning is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Contra Costa County
Posts: 6,912
iTrader: 71 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aBrowningfan View Post
I wish I were as optimistic as you are. Right now, I am sweating the impending ban on Hi-Cap magazines. After that, the ammunition restrictions that kick in Jan 1, 2018.

I now know how an orphan feels.
There is no reason to be anything other than optimistic. We're two justices away from eliminating every gun control provision the left can dream up in California.

National CCW will happen. Not for the benefit of us in CA, but for the people of Free America who don't like being disarmed by a patchwork of laws when they go to other states. It's BS that if you live in Vancouver, WA, you can't carry five minutes from your house in Portland. Gay marriage, and forcing states to recognize licenses issued in another state, pretty much paved the way for this. It might take awhile, but I bet we're carrying in CA prior to 2020.
__________________
Securing a safe to a Post-tension slab - DIY

HK P30SK LEM for sale, S&W 27, S&W 37, Marlin Mountie - NorCal

Quote:
Originally Posted by KWalkerM View Post
eh why bring logic into this, that makes too much sense... besides when you have bested a fool, you have accomplished nothing and he is a fool.
Reply With Quote
  #262  
Old 06-26-2017, 10:13 AM
splithoof splithoof is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 880
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aBrowningfan View Post
I wish I were as optimistic as you are. Right now, I am sweating the impending ban on Hi-Cap magazines. After that, the ammunition restrictions that kick in Jan 1, 2018.

I now know how an orphan feels.
After today, with SCOTUS handing the 9th a victory, the legislature is sure to feel emboldened to only see the above as a starting point to the "Gun Question", and will no doubt come up with the "Final Solution" to what they see as something to be eradicated from society. I liken it to a new Fourth Reich, with the CA DOJ acting as the modern Gestapo, and local sheriffs eager to route us patriots.
Reply With Quote
  #263  
Old 06-26-2017, 10:13 AM
aBrowningfan aBrowningfan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 512
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Browning View Post
There is no reason to be anything other than optimistic. We're two justices away from eliminating every gun control provision the left can dream up in California.

National CCW will happen. Not for the benefit of us in CA, but for the people of Free America who don't like being disarmed by a patchwork of laws when they go to other states. It's BS that if you live in Vancouver, WA, you can't carry five minutes from your house in Portland. Gay marriage, and forcing states to recognize licenses issued in another state, pretty much paved the way for this. It might take awhile, but I bet we're carrying in CA prior to 2020.
I would settle for stays on the Hi-Cap magazine ban and ammunition restrictions.

I have heard the arguments for national CCW, but I don't see it happening, not before 2020. The legislative priority seems to be repeal of healthcare and tax cuts. Tax cuts are more important to the donor class than national CCW. The donor class can buy themselves a CCW.
Reply With Quote
  #264  
Old 06-26-2017, 10:16 AM
aBrowningfan aBrowningfan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 512
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by splithoof View Post
After today, with SCOTUS handing the 9th a victory, the legislature is sure to feel emboldened to only see the above as a starting point to the "Gun Question", and will no doubt come up with the "Final Solution" to what they see as something to be eradicated from society. I liken it to a new Fourth Reich, with the CA DOJ acting as the modern Gestapo, and local sheriffs eager to route us patriots.
The Legislature didn't have to wait for today's denial of cert. They have been quite busy curtailing 2A rights since way before.
Reply With Quote
  #265  
Old 06-26-2017, 10:18 AM
John Browning's Avatar
John Browning John Browning is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Contra Costa County
Posts: 6,912
iTrader: 71 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aBrowningfan View Post
I would settle for stays on the Hi-Cap magazine ban and ammunition restrictions.

I have heard the arguments for national CCW, but I don't see it happening, not before 2020. The legislative priority seems to be repeal of healthcare and tax cuts. Tax cuts are more important to the donor class than national CCW. The donor class can buy themselves a CCW.
National CCW will happen. The shooting of Steve Scalise got that fast tracked because they saw first hand how the patchwork makes people less safe. It will happen, the left will raise a stink for a week, and then they'll move on like locusts to the next field of outrage and we'll be set.
__________________
Securing a safe to a Post-tension slab - DIY

HK P30SK LEM for sale, S&W 27, S&W 37, Marlin Mountie - NorCal

Quote:
Originally Posted by KWalkerM View Post
eh why bring logic into this, that makes too much sense... besides when you have bested a fool, you have accomplished nothing and he is a fool.
Reply With Quote
  #266  
Old 06-26-2017, 10:20 AM
splithoof splithoof is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 880
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aBrowningfan View Post
The Legislature didn't have to wait for today's denial of cert. They have been quite busy curtailing 2A rights since way before.
I know this, I have been seriously watching for the past thirty-seven years...
Reply With Quote
  #267  
Old 06-26-2017, 10:22 AM
GM4spd's Avatar
GM4spd GM4spd is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Thousand Oaks
Posts: 5,083
iTrader: 99 / 100%
Default

No surprise here. Anyone thinking the supremes are going to overturn
any other CA bans are in for a shock.
__________________
NRA LIFE (1974)

Since 1971 using/abusing my Colt ARs(thru thousands of rds) some Full Auto----no spares required.

I had a commission/USNR from 71-77 but neverconsider myself a Veteran.MyDad+4uncles/USMC/WW2/Korea/Vietnam. My Grandfather US Army WW1. No heroes,just regular folks--they were Veterans.
Reply With Quote
  #268  
Old 06-26-2017, 10:23 AM
John Browning's Avatar
John Browning John Browning is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Contra Costa County
Posts: 6,912
iTrader: 71 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IVC View Post
Possibly, but as a Chief Justice he has to keep certain appearances too. He hasn't shown any hostility towards 2A and I don't blame him for not joining dissents.

We will know soon enough, when Kennedy and/or Bader-Ginsburg are replaced.
Justice Hardiman would be a nice fill for RBGs chair.
__________________
Securing a safe to a Post-tension slab - DIY

HK P30SK LEM for sale, S&W 27, S&W 37, Marlin Mountie - NorCal

Quote:
Originally Posted by KWalkerM View Post
eh why bring logic into this, that makes too much sense... besides when you have bested a fool, you have accomplished nothing and he is a fool.
Reply With Quote
  #269  
Old 06-26-2017, 10:24 AM
aBrowningfan aBrowningfan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 512
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Browning View Post
National CCW will happen. The shooting of Steve Scalise got that fast tracked because they saw first hand how the patchwork makes people less safe. It will happen, the left will raise a stink for a week, and then they'll move on like locusts to the next field of outrage and we'll be set.
What got fast-tracked? Last I saw, they were going to add $ to give each member a live-in bodyguard. Members of Congress already qualify for CCWs. Nancy has one, Kamala has one. And, and, and.
Reply With Quote
  #270  
Old 06-26-2017, 10:25 AM
Untamed1972 Untamed1972 is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 17,583
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aBrowningfan View Post
What case will be sufficiently compelling for cert to be granted?

IMO, SCotUS is done with 2A until Kennedy retires.

exactly! All of these carry cases come down to one basic central question......does the 2A protect carry outside the home or not. Just answer the dang question!

I do love the dig at the En Banc panel in the dissent. If overturned I would love to see some impeachment proceedings brought against them for their clear misconduct.
__________________
"Freedom begins with an act of defiance"

Quote for the day:
Quote:
"..the mind is the weapon and the hand only its extention. Discipline your mind!" Master Hao, Chenrezi monastery, Valley of the Sun
Reply With Quote
  #271  
Old 06-26-2017, 10:26 AM
IVC's Avatar
IVC IVC is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Temecula
Posts: 12,674
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by splithoof View Post
After today, with SCOTUS handing the 9th a victory, the legislature is sure to feel emboldened to only see the above as a starting point to the "Gun Question", and will no doubt come up with the "Final Solution" to what they see as something to be eradicated from society. I liken it to a new Fourth Reich, with the CA DOJ acting as the modern Gestapo, and local sheriffs eager to route us patriots.
It's a Pyrrhic victory for the left when the only thing that happened is that the Supreme Court *refused to hear* a case.

What do you think has a better chance: Court taking a case and authoring a legal opinion that the right to carry does NOT exist, or CA getting some sort of carry right via either the courts of the federal legislation?
__________________
NRA Benefactor Member
Reply With Quote
  #272  
Old 06-26-2017, 10:27 AM
IVC's Avatar
IVC IVC is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Temecula
Posts: 12,674
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Browning View Post
Justice Hardiman would be a nice fill for RBGs chair.
Thinking about any judge on Trump's list being promoted to a justice can make me too giddy for a Monday. Let's wait until the time is right...
__________________
NRA Benefactor Member
Reply With Quote
  #273  
Old 06-26-2017, 10:34 AM
SWalt SWalt is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Riverside
Posts: 5,970
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Another disappointment.

Perhaps the SCOTUS is saying that Congress needs to enshrine 2A by legislation? Perhaps Federal legislation is needed to pass muster. Take over the entire 2A field.
__________________
^^^The above is just an opinion.

NRA Patron Member
CRPA 5 yr Member

"...which from their verbosity, their endless tautologies, their involutions of case within case, and parenthesis within parenthesis, and their multiplied efforts at certainty by saids and aforesaids, by ors and by ands, to make them more plain, do really render them more perplexed and incomprehensible, not only to common readers, but to lawyers themselves. " - Thomas Jefferson
Reply With Quote
  #274  
Old 06-26-2017, 10:46 AM
press1280 press1280 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: WV
Posts: 2,170
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by naeco81 View Post
Grace > Nichols > Norman
imo
Unless Grace wins at the DC Circuit (which isn't helped by today's denial), it'll be denied too. It's essentially a copy of Peruta.
Reply With Quote
  #275  
Old 06-26-2017, 10:50 AM
splithoof splithoof is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 880
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IVC View Post
It's a Pyrrhic victory for the left when the only thing that happened is that the Supreme Court *refused to hear* a case.

What do you think has a better chance: Court taking a case and authoring a legal opinion that the right to carry does NOT exist, or CA getting some sort of carry right via either the courts of the federal legislation?
Well at this point I think that it will likely be federal legislation, and only after that legislation is fully vetted through several passes through the appellate process. Even after all that, I'm not convinced that California would actually abide by any federal directives.
I'm going out to purchase a large truckload of popping corn, as I think this will continue to be interesting theatre.
Reply With Quote
  #276  
Old 06-26-2017, 10:51 AM
lowimpactuser lowimpactuser is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,736
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CCWFacts View Post

It's actually good they didn't take the case. I don't want them taking a case if there's any chance they are going to delete "bear" from the 2A. Let's hope Trump will soon get to replace one or more liberal justices.

This outcome will also give a boost to political efforts to solve the problem. National recip, written the right way, would achieve almost the same outcome.
Good thing, or less bad thing? My, the soft bigotry and battered gunowner syndrome is strong here- keeping the status quo is considered a GOOD thing.

Like not getting beaten today is a GOOD thing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by IVC View Post
Overall, this finalizes the proof of political courts. There will be the next case, but it will require different justices. We've gone as far as we can with the current judges and justices. Bummer.
Full KC convert?
Quote:
Originally Posted by IVC View Post
If Kennedy retires we are there. If Bader-Ginsburg passes we are there. Next year or two have a lot of hope for us and a lot of anxiety for the antis.
That assumes Robert's support.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgcasa View Post
So with Thomas and Gorsuch in dissent, and given Alito expressed his continued support for the reasoning behind Scalia's opinion in Heller as recently as this past fall, that leaves Kennedy and/or Roberts as 'wafflers' that may be reconsidering their vote in Heller and/or McDonald. If that is truly the case, then punting further definition on the scope of the 2nd amendment until Kennedy and/or Ginsburg are replaced with a true originalist conservative is probably a "good thing".
Why didn't Alito join this dissent? Why can't we finally get a call-out of the holdouts? Why can we only get a two-person dissent?

Quote:
Originally Posted by sfpcservice View Post
Next stop: Nichols. We will win, and the CA legislate will give us shall issue just to get us to hide our guns.

Nichols will be the pawn no one cared about until he makes it to the other side and gets promoted to a queen. Checkmate.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Calguns derangement syndrome in full swing.

Two weeks! Final victory!

They could have used you in late 1944 Nazi Germany for news announcements and strategy!

Quote:
Originally Posted by cockedandglocked View Post
Here is the 2017 map. California hasn't been this friendly to CCW in perhaps over a century.

No matter where you live in CA, you could move less than an hour away and get a permit.

An hour away WITHOUT traffic. With traffic...

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Browning View Post
There is no reason to be anything other than optimistic. We're two justices away from eliminating every gun control provision the left can dream up in California.

National CCW will happen. Not for the benefit of us in CA, but for the people of Free America who don't like being disarmed by a patchwork of laws when they go to other states. It's BS that if you live in Vancouver, WA, you can't carry five minutes from your house in Portland. Gay marriage, and forcing states to recognize licenses issued in another state, pretty much paved the way for this. It might take awhile, but I bet we're carrying in CA prior to 2020.
That's only if we get Hudson carry and not Cornyn carry. The vast majority of attempts at Reciprocity are HOME-STATE permit restricted.
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Browning View Post
National CCW will happen. The shooting of Steve Scalise got that fast tracked because they saw first hand how the patchwork makes people less safe. It will happen, the left will raise a stink for a week, and then they'll move on like locusts to the next field of outrage and we'll be set.
Well, good luck. Getting the votes in the senate for cloture is... challenging.

Notice that even after a historic defeat the left STILL hasn't walked away from guns at ALL.

They really HAVE made gun control one of the most central planks of the party, like abortion is to the GOP. It pains me to say it, as most people I'm related to are Dems, but it's a fact.

Double down. They really have swallowed the evil pill on guns. They will fight tooth and nail.
__________________
KnifeRights.org/images/KRbanner_468x60-1.gif
Reply With Quote
  #277  
Old 06-26-2017, 10:54 AM
MajorCaliber MajorCaliber is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 95
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SWalt View Post
...Perhaps the SCOTUS is saying that Congress needs to enshrine 2A by legislation? Perhaps Federal legislation is needed to pass muster. Take over the entire 2A field.
Of course that should not be necessary, The existing 2A should override any federal or state legislation, but yet apparently even that is not enough. The idea of needing legislation to guarantee a constitutional right is just upside down.

Here's an idea though. Has anybody proposed or really thought through the idea of a parallel FEDERAL permit process for average citizens? Maybe the answer here is to have legislation for a Federal permit process, administered by the DOJ or ATF, that allows regular citizens to have a permit, good in all 50 states, that cannot be over-ridden by state or local laws. Rights guaranteed in the Federal constitution should never be considered a sates-rights issue.
__________________
The more time I spend on this forum, the more sense kcbrown makes.
Reply With Quote
  #278  
Old 06-26-2017, 10:55 AM
surfgeorge surfgeorge is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 512
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aBrowningfan View Post
What case will be sufficiently compelling for cert to be granted?

IMO, SCotUS is done with 2A until Kennedy retires.
Well, Norman is a "clean" open carry case (none of the "extraneous" issue of Peruta) . The Norman lawyer has indicated he will file for cert, and has two weeks left to do so.

Of course that doesn't mean cert will be granted, only that it may surpass the threshold hinted at by Thomas wherein "[HE] [saw] no reason to await another case".

Like you say, that doesn't overcome the Kennedy/Roberts problem(s), so perhaps the "cleaner case" hypothesis is void. I guess we might find out around the October-December time frame. Oh goodie.
Reply With Quote
  #279  
Old 06-26-2017, 10:58 AM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Not a mod or lawyer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 12,240
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lowimpactuser View Post
An hour away WITHOUT traffic. With traffic....
I know, but you get my point. 10 to 20 years ago, CCW was almost unheard of in this state, something only a limited few people in fringe counties had. Now, it's the norm in the VAST geographical majority of CA. And I think Peruta was largely responsible for that.

The fact that the rise in CCW prevalence here in CA hasn't caused "rivers of blood in the streets" as the democrats had hoped, makes me optimistic that the trend will continue.
Reply With Quote
  #280  
Old 06-26-2017, 10:59 AM
Lex Talionis's Avatar
Lex Talionis Lex Talionis is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 469
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

What is really needed is a case (hypothetically speaking) where a citizen is bearing arms illegally (by state or local statue) and then uses that weapon logically and legally to defend his own life from an attacker despite that ban, but then is prosecuted resulting with his constitutionally protected 2nd Amendment rights being revoked.

I wonder what would be the result of case like that on appeal to the SCOTUS with a better court than we currently have with Kennedy on board?

Justice Thomas was spot on in pointing out that LOGICALLY the founding fathers would not have been limiting the 2nd amendment to carrying a gun from the bedroom to the kitchen and that a universal right to BEAR arms was included in the keeping of arms.
__________________


THE LAW OF RETALIATION - an eye for an eye
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 7:33 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 2002-2016, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.