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 > California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism Discuss gun rights activism and 2A related political topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-10-2010, 11:11 PM
Gray Peterson's Avatar
Gray Peterson Gray Peterson is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lynnwood, WA
Posts: 5,818
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default Post-Peruta Thoughts, and What We As Gun Owners Need to Do Next...

Hello All. I realize that there are three or four post-Peruta threads on the subject, but I believe that my thoughts on the issue, considering my role in helping fix the Sheriff's Offices on issuance policy, would probably get lost in the shuffle.

Brandon made this very important post:

Quote:
This is a bad district court decision; however, it's not insurmountable. Take a deep breath and stay focused on the fight ahead (there is plenty). Peruta is a case that was never supposed to be filed in the manner it was for this very reason. An outcome such as we've seen here isn't entirely surprising. However, this calls to attention the absolutely critical nature of the appellate-level litigation; the combination of the right case and advocate are that much more important.
I'm disappointed in the decision, of course, but I'm duly frustrated by this very serious risk in the 9th caused by impatience and whatever else. Self-inflicted injury tends to smart a bit.
The Peruta decision was a very painful loss for gun owners in this state and nationwide. My case, Peterson v. LaCabe, used many elements of the Peruta motion to dismiss denial to support it's case. Though small (it's always better to directly cite the text of Heller, and McDonald, as Judge Gonzalez apparently cannot do), it is going to make the case more difficult as it will be cited as persuasive authority (though, Denver doesn't allow ANY form of OC, unloaded or no).

I was outraged at Judge Gonzalez' decision and the entire situation surrounding it, that even I, usually quite unflappable, got as seething and angry as many of you did reading the decision.

I had to go back to my own past, especially after falling down on the ground and getting hurt in the process, hearing these words:

"Get off your *** and get moving".

Folks, it's time to get off our ***es and get moving.



Gene Hoffman, starting at 10:22: "But......we are going to lose some cases. You cannot go to battle and assume we will win every single case in every single state. However, sometimes losing is not a bad thing. Getting these cases out of district courts, getting these cases to courts of appeals, creating splits between the federal circuit courts of appeals, so we can get this man *points to Alan Gura next to him* in front of the Nine Justices of the Supreme Court, and that's what matters....

"Beause, at the end of the day, we care, we're all well funded, we care about the republic, we have the team necessary to win all of these rights, and we will win."

Here is a rundown of future actions and situations:

1) Nordyke v. King is still in process in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Not even a few months ago, many of my friends in this movement descended on San Francisco to attend this case. You can hear the audio here. And you know, I even bought a suit and went down to San Francisco It is widely expected that scrutiny on most if not all 2A issues will be resolved in the 9th Circuit by this case. Last time this case was heard, it was decided in 90 days. Don Kilmer is the lead counsel on this. Also, it considers 1A and 14th amendment equal protection clause (which was the clause discussed in Peruta).

2) Richards v. Prieto, the original carry case in California, which is in process. This is done by Alan Gura and the CGF.

3) Peña v. Cid, waiting for Nordyke. Also by Alan Gura and the CGF

4) Peterson v. LaCabe, the non-resident carry licensing case. The posture of my case is different than Peruta for multiple reasons, there's no UOC option, plus AG Suthers of Colorado has put himself into a bind for several different reasons.

5) Several different Alan Gura filed carry cases nationwide. Cases by John Monroe filed in Georgia, Colorado (my case), and Wisconsin. Cases filed by the Mountain States Legal Foundation (Bonidy v. US Postal Service and Mishaga v. Monken), as well as some NRA filed cases in Texas.

6) Last but not least, the Licensing Compliance and Education Initiative that we started quietly months ago and publicly announced just six weeks ago. The good causes of 15 counties has been posted. The effects of the Carry License Compliance Initiative has born much fruit for gun owners in quiet ways, some of which cannot be publicly discussed yet. All sheriffs, including the sheriff's that think they're protected because of an political endorsement from a gun rights group, are realizing quite quickly that no matter how publicly pro-gun and pro-self defense good case a sheriff is, doesn't insulate them from attention from CGF. Simply put: Actions matter, words do not, and you cannot claim to be pro-gun when you break the law in ways that makes an applicant's application process more difficult.

I encourage everyone who is reading this, especially those who are most angry at the Peruta case, volunteer for the initiative and throw some funds down to sponsor a county. San Diego is a good county to donate to, considering the fight that will be ahead on that front on state law compliance issues. Sheriff Gore might be smiling right now due to Peruta, but he won't be smiling for long......

"Get off your *** and get moving".

Besides the sponsorships, remember that freedom isn't free.

Last edited by Gray Peterson; 12-11-2010 at 8:06 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-10-2010, 11:28 PM
Blackhawk556's Avatar
Blackhawk556 Blackhawk556 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: FresNO, Ca
Posts: 3,909
iTrader: 18 / 100%
Default

good words

you sound like a coach telling his team to not worry, this is a lose, but we will win the next game
__________________
CZ 75 SP-01 ROCKS!
"If guns kill people, do pencils misspell words?"
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-10-2010, 11:30 PM
sd_shooter's Avatar
sd_shooter sd_shooter is online now
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Hill Country, TX
Posts: 6,045
iTrader: 79 / 100%
Default

Thanks for the post! We still need about a dozen sponsors for San Diego.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-10-2010, 11:30 PM
Liberty1's Avatar
Liberty1 Liberty1 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 5,543
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default



Can't add any more then that. Time to redouble the efforts!
__________________
False is the idea of utility that sacrifices a thousand real advantages for one imaginary or trifling inconvenience; that would take fire from men because it burns, and water because one may drown in it; that has no remedy for evils except destruction. The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.
-- Cesare Beccaria http://www.a-human-right.com/
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 12-10-2010, 11:31 PM
frankm's Avatar
frankm frankm is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Occupied Vespuchia
Posts: 10,335
iTrader: 26 / 100%
Default

Thanks for the kind words. And I know I speak for myself, but my advice is everyone run out and buy a black rifle. Just to feel better.
__________________
RKBA Clock: soap box, ballot box, jury box, cartridge box (moved right 1/15/20, for old Virginny)
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 12-10-2010, 11:31 PM
Gray Peterson's Avatar
Gray Peterson Gray Peterson is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lynnwood, WA
Posts: 5,818
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackhawk556 View Post
good words

you sound like a coach telling his team to not worry, this is a lose, but we will win the next game
More than that. I'm not telling my team to not worry, or that we'll just win the next game by pure luck or chance. After telling them this, they work on what went wrong and what plays were done incorrectly. Worry is also the wrong term. The more correct term is "Fix the problem".
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12-10-2010, 11:41 PM
goober's Avatar
goober goober is offline
Veteran Member
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: da sloo
Posts: 4,938
iTrader: 12 / 100%
Default

HUZZAAAH!

thanks Gray for some much needed perspective as well as pep-talk...

we do have work to do...
__________________
Live between Santa Cruz and SLO? Want to get involved?
Check out the Central Coast Calguns Community Chapter
And join the Central Coast Region Social Group!
NRA Life Member - CRPA Life & Board Member - SAF Life Member - Monterey County Carry Initiative Sponsor
Statements posted here are the sole opinions of the author and not those
of CGN, CGF, CRPA, or any other institution or agency unless otherwise noted.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 12-10-2010, 11:44 PM
Gray Peterson's Avatar
Gray Peterson Gray Peterson is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lynnwood, WA
Posts: 5,818
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

One more thing:

Maryland Shooters Thread on Nationwide 2A litigation.

Remember: The Allies didn't win every battle of WW2. Loses were brutal, especially at the beginning.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 12-11-2010, 12:16 AM
Nor-Cal's Avatar
Nor-Cal Nor-Cal is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: MODESTO
Posts: 1,235
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Slowly but surely!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 12-11-2010, 3:10 AM
nicki's Avatar
nicki nicki is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 4,208
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default Shocked in wrong way.

To say I was shocked would be a understatement. I actually thought based on how the proceedings were going so far, that this would be a smackdown on the Sheriff.

After I thought about this a while, this type of WTF shock also occurred when the Judge in Jim March's CCW case did the same thing.

Jim had busted his butt putting things together and he get KOed when the Judge went to rational basis.

The case is not over, she could rule favorable on other things. The issue right now is to clear up this case quickly so that it can be appealed.

I think that we need to consider going after the loaded carry ban and the 1000 foot GFZ issue.

If we get loaded open carry and tailor the school zone down to only school property, then LOC is practical.

Mass LOC will motivate the sheriffs so start issuing CCW permits.

Nicki
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 12-11-2010, 5:22 AM
Billy Jack's Avatar
Billy Jack Billy Jack is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 685
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default It isn't over until we say its over.........................

........did we give up when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor......?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lf74T5t-f3k&NR=1


Billy Jack
Patriot & Son of Liberty


www.californiaconcealedcarry.com

Last edited by Billy Jack; 12-13-2010 at 7:50 AM.. Reason: Spelling
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 12-11-2010, 7:01 AM
Gray Peterson's Avatar
Gray Peterson Gray Peterson is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lynnwood, WA
Posts: 5,818
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Billy Jack View Post
........do we give up when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor......?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lf74T5t-f3k&NR=1


Billy Jack
Patriot & Son of Liberty


www.californiaconcealedcarry.com
One of the best scenes from a movie ever. John Belushi still gives me laughs, 30 years after being dead.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 12-11-2010, 7:30 AM
Mulay El Raisuli's Avatar
Mulay El Raisuli Mulay El Raisuli is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Oceanside, CA
Posts: 3,595
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nicki View Post
To say I was shocked would be a understatement. I actually thought based on how the proceedings were going so far, that this would be a smackdown on the Sheriff.

After I thought about this a while, this type of WTF shock also occurred when the Judge in Jim March's CCW case did the same thing.

Jim had busted his butt putting things together and he get KOed when the Judge went to rational basis.

The case is not over, she could rule favorable on other things. The issue right now is to clear up this case quickly so that it can be appealed.

I think that we need to consider going after the loaded carry ban and the 1000 foot GFZ issue.

If we get loaded open carry and tailor the school zone down to only school property, then LOC is practical.

Mass LOC will motivate the sheriffs so start issuing CCW permits.


Nicki

Yup. That's what worked in Ohio. Maybe its time we tried that here.


The Raisuli
__________________
"Ignorance is a steep hill with perilous rocks at the bottom"

WTB: 9mm cylinder for Taurus Mod. 85
WTS: Model 94 AE 30-30
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 12-11-2010, 8:44 AM
NoJoke's Avatar
NoJoke NoJoke is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,538
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gray Peterson View Post
"Get off your *** and get moving".

Besides the sponsorships, remember that freedom isn't free.
Is it just me? I tried to donate and checkout via paypal....and got an error page.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 12-11-2010, 8:58 AM
Maestro Pistolero's Avatar
Maestro Pistolero Maestro Pistolero is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 3,891
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

In some ways I think a direct attack on the unloaded requirement might be the fastest path to shall-issue, for all the reasons you can probably guess.

Because Heller clarified a right to carry a functional firearm, defeating the unloaded requirement rests on a single question: Is carry protected outside of the home, or not?

Once the anti-tards have to actually LOOK at loaded guns in public, shall-issue will be a gigantic relief for them, instead of something to resist.
__________________
www.christopherjhoffman.com

The Second Amendment is the one right that is so fundamental that the inability to exercise it, should the need arise, would render all other rights null and void. Dead people have no rights.
Magna est veritas et praevalebit
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 12-11-2010, 9:11 AM
Stonewalker's Avatar
Stonewalker Stonewalker is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 2,781
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Thanks for the good words. I thought of Gene's words when I read the decision. This would have been a huge win but it's not a huge loss. Just need more time, $$$ and resources - luckily we've got some dedicated workers and some dedicated givers. I need to pony up and send some love.

To sort of piggy-back on Billy Jacks' video...

__________________
member: Electronic Frontier Foundation, NRA, CGF

Deer Hunting Rifles? "Let's get rid of those too" - Adam Keigwin, Chief of Staff for Senator Leland Yee
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 12-11-2010, 9:50 AM
CCWFacts CCWFacts is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 5,850
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

What does this mean? Can't there be an appeal to the dismissal? Or is it final, meaning the case is dead? How does this impact the Sykes case?
__________________
"H--l, yes, we're going to take your AR-15"
- Robert "Beto" O'Rourke

Math denialism: We can have free, universal healthcare, $15/hr minimum wage, and open borders.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 12-11-2010, 9:58 AM
Merle Merle is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: East Lake Tahoe
Posts: 372
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestro Pistolero View Post
In some ways I think a direct attack on the unloaded requirement might be the fastest path to shall-issue, for all the reasons you can probably guess.

Because Heller clarified a right to carry a functional firearm, defeating the unloaded requirement rests on a single question: Is carry protected outside of the home, or not?

Once the anti-tards have to actually LOOK at loaded guns in public, shall-issue will be a gigantic relief for them, instead of something to resist.
I agree 100%. Getting LOC in CA recognized as the basis for carrying a functional firearm under the 2A would get shall issue in very short order.

Plus legal UOC would then be a necessary extension of UOC as once you unload into a perp, you're technically UOC'ng.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 12-11-2010, 11:40 AM
nicki's Avatar
nicki nicki is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 4,208
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default Bright side.

If the California Legislature tries to go after UOC now, we can get San Diego on our side to oppose a bill such as AB1934.

We can expect district court judges to avoid ruling in our favor, just the name of the game.

From what I have heard, you get no justice at the district courts, you have to appeal to get any kind of justice.

The bright side is Peruta will be appealed. If Ed won and San Diego caved, we would have a ruling that could only effect San Diego and Imperial counties.

Nicki
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 12-11-2010, 12:08 PM
hoffmang's Avatar
hoffmang hoffmang is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Peninsula, Bay Area
Posts: 18,447
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestro Pistolero View Post
In some ways I think a direct attack on the unloaded requirement might be the fastest path to shall-issue, for all the reasons you can probably guess.
If an anti gun judge is pushing that line of reasoning it should be a strong hint that its a bad idea.

Amongst many of the chess pieces one has to be thinking about is the political reality in this state as well as the types of unconstitutional laws in other states.

-Gene
__________________
Gene Hoffman
Chairman, The Calguns Foundation

DONATE NOW
to support the rights of California gun owners. Follow @CalgunsFdn 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
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 12-11-2010, 12:58 PM
navyinrwanda's Avatar
navyinrwanda navyinrwanda is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 598
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hoffmang View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestro Pistolero View Post
In some ways I think a direct attack on the unloaded requirement might be the fastest path to shall-issue, for all the reasons you can probably guess.
If an anti gun judge is pushing that line of reasoning it should be a strong hint that its a bad idea.

Amongst many of the chess pieces one has to be thinking about is the political reality in this state as well as the types of unconstitutional laws in other states.

-Gene
I think it would helpful for you to expound a bit more on why this is a bad idea.

One reading of this decision is that the judge properly avoided deciding the constitutional issues. That she also read Heller narrowly (construing the core right as possession of a functional handgun in the home) puts her well within the judicial mainstream.

So she accepted the San Diego Sheriff's argument that California does not impose a complete ban on armed self-defense in public: the lack of a flat ban on carrying an unloaded handgun works with the PC 12031(j) immediate, grave danger exception to offer a valid alternative to licensed concealed carry.

Some guidance is now called for if this decision is to be seen as something other than judicial endorsement of UOC.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 12-11-2010, 1:20 PM
Untamed1972 Untamed1972 is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 17,580
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sd_shooter View Post
Thanks for the post! We still need about a dozen sponsors for San Diego.

Inbound for SD county sponsorship!

Amount $ 350.00
Date December 11th, 2010 1:12 PM
Transaction # 58T31017PN106322W
__________________
"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
  #23  
Old 12-11-2010, 1:25 PM
wildhawker's Avatar
wildhawker wildhawker is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: California
Posts: 14,231
iTrader: 84 / 100%
Default





Quote:
Originally Posted by Untamed1972 View Post
Inbound for SD county sponsorship!

Amount $ 350.00
Date December 11th, 2010 1:12 PM
Transaction # 58T31017PN106322W
__________________
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.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 12-11-2010, 1:30 PM
Window_Seat's Avatar
Window_Seat Window_Seat is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Phoenix, AZ (The United States of America)
Posts: 3,535
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

OC in any capacity (sorry for the pun) is a bad venue for any kind of reform, and it's likewise a bad thing when it comes out of the courts (IMO), is it not?

Erik.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 12-11-2010, 1:49 PM
CalBear's Avatar
CalBear CalBear is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 4,279
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

The wheels of justice are slow, and they won't always turn in our favor. I think the ruling by the judge in Peruta is an outrage and a travesty, but this type of stuff is going to happen once in a while. Appellate level will be more important, as usual. It's hard to overemphasize the importance of cultural, social and political acceptance of gun rights. It's hard to rely on the courts to always uphold our rights. The CGF carry initiative and some of these cases are very important in the immediate future, but if we want easier lives in this state as gun owners, we need more support to change horrid laws.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 12-11-2010, 1:49 PM
nicki's Avatar
nicki nicki is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 4,208
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default Anti gun judge suggestion.

A few years back the Ohio Supreme court had to rule on the "Feely vs Hamilton County" regarding a Ohio RKBA challenge to the state's ban on carrying concealed firearms.

Up to the Ohio Supreme court, the lower courts had agreed with Feely and Ohio was on it's way to being another Vermont.

The Ohio Supreme court came up with a piece of legalistic bs which they upheld the ban on carrying concealed arms because the people of Ohio always had the right to OPEN CARRY.

Of course what happened prior to that is anyone who would Open Carry would be subject to being arrested for disturbing the peace.

Ohio gun rights activist responded with open carry marches which resulted in the State finally passing a shall issue CCW bill which the Gov had been stonewalling for close to 8 years.

I don't think the Ohio Supreme court thought out that they would spur Open Carry Marches across the state.

I find it Ironic that San Diego would defend open carry considering that Lori Saldana sponsored a bill to stop it and the vigorous persecution of Thesius for a so called school zone violation way after the fact.

When you engage in twisting the law so that you can make a ruling, the law of unintended consequences is in full force because when a Judge writes a twisted ruling, they are bound to miss something.

The idea that UOC is okay because we can load up if a conflict arises is bs.

What if you have only one arm, there is no way you can quickly load your gun. We might even have someone in this forum who meets this criteria.

The San Diego lawyer argued that a person could load in 3 seconds. Perhaps he should demonstrate how fast he can do that in court.

My average fast reload speed is right at 3 seconds and that is drawing with the slide already back and no mag in the gun.

Most people who UOC carry with slide forward, so load up time would for most would be at least 4 to 5 seconds.

I doubt he could do that. I doubt the average cop could do that either and they carry all the time as part of their job.

What we do is give him a typical gun with dummy rounds and have 2 to 3 guys rush him and his goal is to load before they can touch him.

I remember a certain Maryland governor who was having a press conference and couldn't remove a gun lock while talkiing about proposed safe storage laws.

Nicki
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 12-11-2010, 2:14 PM
Untamed1972 Untamed1972 is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 17,580
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nicki View Post
What if you have only one arm, there is no way you can quickly load your gun. We might even have someone in this forum who meets this criteria.

The San Diego lawyer argued that a person could load in 3 seconds. Perhaps he should demonstrate how fast he can do that in court.

My average fast reload speed is right at 3 seconds and that is drawing with the slide already back and no mag in the gun.

Most people who UOC carry with slide forward, so load up time would for most would be at least 4 to 5 seconds.

I doubt he could do that. I doubt the average cop could do that either and they carry all the time as part of their job.

What we do is give him a typical gun with dummy rounds and have 2 to 3 guys rush him and his goal is to load before they can touch him.

I remember a certain Maryland governor who was having a press conference and couldn't remove a gun lock while talkiing about proposed safe storage laws.

Nicki
the claims that one can load in time to defend themselves to me is easily debunked by the fact that this is directly opposite of what every LEO in the country is taight today. And what about justifed LE shootings where the person had a knife or baseball bat and was shot from 20+ feet away? They were justified because it has been determined that a person with a knife or club can cover a distance of 21ft in the time it takes to draw an openly holster, loaded weapon and get a shot off. Now compound this with stats that show that most (like 75%+) LE or self-defense shootings happen at VERY close range, like 3ft or less, and that most gunfights only last 2-3 seconds and the notion that UOC is sufficient is absurd.

The judges comments in the ruling seemed to be pointing to only considering protecting yourself against a known threat that you would see coming, like an angry ex or someone you've previously had a confrontation with. She completely ignored a persons need to defend themselves from suprise, random attack in which having time to load will be non-existent.

She also seemed to completely ingnore some of the dicta in Heller refering to having armed people able to immediately respond to Mumbai style attacks, which was clearly talking about being armed outside of the home, not mention refering to sensitive places like schools and gov't buildings. So if you remove schools and gov't buildings that still leaves a whole lot of places not addressed.

Twice she quoted the "most acute in the home" line. But it amazes me that someone can quote that, then read it as "only in the home". When you say "most acutely in the home" by extention that means acutely, but to a lesser degree outside the home".

That is an argument I haven't seen used to counter the "only in the home" line used by the anti's and always wondered why. seems like such a simple argument to make.
__________________
"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
  #28  
Old 12-11-2010, 2:45 PM
hoffmang's Avatar
hoffmang hoffmang is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Peninsula, Bay Area
Posts: 18,447
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by navyinrwanda View Post
I think it would helpful for you to expound a bit more on why this is a bad idea.

One reading of this decision is that the judge properly avoided deciding the constitutional issues. That she also read Heller narrowly (construing the core right as possession of a functional handgun in the home) puts her well within the judicial mainstream.

So she accepted the San Diego Sheriff's argument that California does not impose a complete ban on armed self-defense in public: the lack of a flat ban on carrying an unloaded handgun works with the PC 12031(j) immediate, grave danger exception to offer a valid alternative to licensed concealed carry.

Some guidance is now called for if this decision is to be seen as something other than judicial endorsement of UOC.
Heller decided that arms that are protected for keeping and bearing are functional firearms. Unloaded firearms are not functional. That she wishes to ignore that the holding of Heller is not so limited (she ignores that it is impossible to have a sensitive place in your home for example) just means she's anti gun.

Let me state an axiom for you. If 12031 was ruled unconstitutional, the legislature of California would not pass shall issue carry licensing. There are nowhere near the votes necessary. As such, carrying in California would be a complete pain in the rear and would be effectively dissuaded by LEA's and private actors like malls, and restaurants.

-Gene
__________________
Gene Hoffman
Chairman, The Calguns Foundation

DONATE NOW
to support the rights of California gun owners. Follow @CalgunsFdn 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
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 12-11-2010, 2:48 PM
dantodd dantodd is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: San Carlos
Posts: 9,361
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

As long as the GFSZs are in effect open carry is worthless.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 12-11-2010, 2:48 PM
wildhawker's Avatar
wildhawker wildhawker is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: California
Posts: 14,231
iTrader: 84 / 100%
Default

Never mind the load time argument - it's not like we ever told UOC participants that it was the wrong argument to make in support of UOC as 2A activity.
__________________
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.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 12-11-2010, 2:52 PM
CalBear's Avatar
CalBear CalBear is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 4,279
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dantodd View Post
As long as the GFSZs are in effect open carry is worthless.
GFSZs for one, and the gun-nut society. And yes, from here on out my use of gun-nut refers to someone who is downright irrational and crazy about anything involving guns (The Brady bunch, et. al.). UOC or LOC won't help us much in CA, and as Gene said, we don't have anywhere near enough votes in the legislature right now to get shall issue. We need to keep pushing for sheriff dept reform and being smart in where / when cases are filed. And as usual, try to reform gun-nuts you know. Educate them.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 12-11-2010, 3:13 PM
Gray Peterson's Avatar
Gray Peterson Gray Peterson is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lynnwood, WA
Posts: 5,818
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wildhawker View Post
Ouch, that's gonna leave a mark.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 12-11-2010, 3:33 PM
uyoga's Avatar
uyoga uyoga is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor - Lifetime
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Ventura County
Posts: 680
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hoffmang View Post
Let me state an axiom for you. If 12031 was ruled unconstitutional, the legislature of California would not pass shall issue carry licensing. There are nowhere near the votes necessary. As such, carrying in California would be a complete pain in the rear and would be effectively dissuaded by LEA's and private actors like malls, and restaurants.

-Gene
It is abundantly clear that reliance on the legislature to create laws that will secure and protect our rights is out of the question.

The only avenue now available to us is the Federal Courts. Taking this route requires the patience to realize that a battle can not be successfully waged unless issues are ripe, the facts are clearly on our side, and we are attacking with singleness of purpose. We can not afford to blindly forge ahead simply because we can file a suit. Patience . . . Counsel . . . Strategy . . . Tactics . . . Victory.

Let the mourning period be brief. We now need to continue our support of this fine organization, both moral and financial.

PS. I cant believe she even quoted Zimring.
__________________
Non verbis sed operis

Last edited by uyoga; 12-11-2010 at 3:59 PM.. Reason: typo
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 12-11-2010, 3:48 PM
cmth cmth is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Oregon
Posts: 520
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

The title of the thread is: "Post-Peruta Thoughts, and What We As Gun Owners Need to Do Next...", and my first thought post-Peruta was that I am still entirely justified in my decision to leave the state for good. I also believe that it is the best choice for "we" gun owners, especially those of us who value other aspects of liberty besides gun freedom. It is my belief that no amount of activism can bring about positive change for liberty in the whole of California (still waiting to be proven wrong), so that is why I am advocating that people leave the state.
__________________
Libertas aut Mors
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 12-11-2010, 3:59 PM
Librarian's Avatar
Librarian Librarian is offline
Administrator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Cottage Grove, OR
Posts: 39,535
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Blog Entries: 6
Default

Leaving CA as a plan deserves its own thread.
__________________
No one will really understand politics until they understand that politicians are not trying to solve our problems. They are trying to solve their own problems - of which getting elected and re-elected are number one and number two. Whatever is number three is far behind.
- Thomas Sowell
I've been saying that for years ...

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.


Gregg Easterbrook’s “Law of Doomsaying”: Predict catastrophe no later than ten years hence but no sooner than five years away — soon enough to terrify people but distant enough that they will not remember that you were wrong.


Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs.


Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 12-11-2010, 6:36 PM
navyinrwanda's Avatar
navyinrwanda navyinrwanda is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 598
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hoffmang View Post
Heller decided that arms that are protected for keeping and bearing are functional firearms. Unloaded firearms are not functional. That she wishes to ignore that the holding of Heller is not so limited (she ignores that it is impossible to have a sensitive place in your home for example) just means she's anti gun.

Let me state an axiom for you. If 12031 was ruled unconstitutional, the legislature of California would not pass shall issue carry licensing. There are nowhere near the votes necessary. As such, carrying in California would be a complete pain in the rear and would be effectively dissuaded by LEA's and private actors like malls, and restaurants.

-Gene
I was only suggesting that it might be helpful to offer some more insight into our strategy and tactics beyond “we got a bad judge,” including what we can do to avoid a similar mistake in the future.

Also, it would be interesting to hear how we might refute some of the conclusions reached in this decision. I complete agree with you that “Unloaded firearms are not functional.” But the judge didn't. And she clearly found the no-exceptions trigger lock restrictions at issue in Heller distinguishable.

It's probably still too early to know exactly how best to respond to this setback. But as we do, it'd be nice to share some of those conclusions more widely.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 12-11-2010, 6:54 PM
hoffmang's Avatar
hoffmang hoffmang is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Peninsula, Bay Area
Posts: 18,447
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by navyinrwanda View Post
I was only suggesting that it might be helpful to offer some more insight into our strategy and tactics beyond “we got a bad judge,” including what we can do to avoid a similar mistake in the future.
The only thing we can do is try to dissuade people from bringing cases in bad places. We tried on this, but the plaintiff was very set on his path.

-Gene
__________________
Gene Hoffman
Chairman, The Calguns Foundation

DONATE NOW
to support the rights of California gun owners. Follow @CalgunsFdn 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
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 12-11-2010, 6:59 PM
glbtrottr's Avatar
glbtrottr glbtrottr is online now
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: By the Beach, Baby!
Posts: 3,527
iTrader: 49 / 87%
Default

The reality is that we agreed, and disagreed, and agreed and back and forth with Mr. Peruta's valiant desires to pursue this in San Diego. Further, after "the right team" got behind Mr. Peruta, we were eager to see him succeed. Checking out the smoke on the Judicial conclave on her previous decision, few would have called her a "bad judge". It wasn't until her final decision was published that we decided we didn't like her.

Gray makes a good point on involvement - the reality is that for too long we have allowed California to become far to liberalized, either because we weren't looking, or because of the political affiliations of those who would bring these nannified judges to the bench. What to do? The wives, the feminized men, the irrational, the passive aggressive, the legal and illegal immigrants have all contributed to the current state...

Getting involved is a given - sponsorships, donations to Calguns are certainly an awesome thing to do, and given the substantial successes that the team has accomplished is beyond question.

What else?

BE OUTRAGED.

Guns are NOT a politically incorrect topic! Your friends, your family, everyone around you should really understand what is at stake - the whole idea of "gun nuts" couldn't be more ridiculous. How do all those sucking on the American tit think that this country became what it is?

Be bold. Have the discussions. While we may not have the immediate results that we would like, the only way to really get more people to understand is to talk about the topic, debate it if you will, and educate people...
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 12-11-2010, 7:15 PM
mblat mblat is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 3,255
iTrader: 31 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Billy Jack View Post
........do we give up when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor......?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lf74T5t-f3k&NR=1


Billy Jack
Patriot & Son of Liberty


www.californiaconcealedcarry.com
May be we didn't because Germans never did it....
__________________
Quote:
The essence of Western civilization is the Magna Carta, not the Magna Mac. The fact that non-Westerners may bite into the later has no implications for their accepting the former.
S.P. Huntington.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 12-11-2010, 7:28 PM
ke6guj's Avatar
ke6guj ke6guj is offline
Moderator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: 909
Posts: 23,764
iTrader: 42 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mblat View Post
May be we didn't because Germans never did it....


BJ was refering to this bit of animal house

__________________
Jack



Do you want an AOW or C&R SBS/SBR in CA?

No posts of mine are to be construed as legal advice, which can only be given by a lawyer.

Last edited by Kestryll; 12-14-2010 at 1:13 PM..
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 9:40 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, 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 2002-2020, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.
Tactical Pants Tactical Boots Tactical Gear Military Boots 5.11 Tactical