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
  #1  
Old 12-02-2015, 8:17 PM
FilmGuy's Avatar
FilmGuy FilmGuy is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 84
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default L.A. City Council votes to allow more exemptions to ammunition limit

L.A. City Council votes to allow more exemptions to ammunition limit

December 2, 2015

LA Times

I a hotly contested move, Los Angeles lawmakers decided Wednesday to carve out more exemptions to a city law meant to curb the carnage of mass shootings, arguing that it would better protect the public from such attacks.

The Los Angeles City Council voted 11 to 4 to allow some retired and reserve police officers to possess firearm magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition. The City Hall deliberations played out at the same time that reports emergedof a mass shooting in San Bernardino — news that Councilman Mitch Englander shared just before the vote.

The debate pitted the Los Angeles Police Department and the police union, a politically muscular group that has been an important player in local elections, against some of the gun-control activists who had championed the L.A. ban on such ammunition magazines as a way to force attackers to interrupt their rampages sooner to reload.

Police argued that exempting retired and reserve officers from the citywide ban, which was passed earlier this year, would ensure they were equipped to face threats to public safety. In the throes of an attack, "wouldn't you want some guy to stand up with a gun and be able to defend people?" asked Peter Repovich, director of the Los Angeles Police Protective League.

Article continues...

Article Link

http://www.latimes.com/local/cityhal...203-story.html
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-02-2015, 8:22 PM
jcourson's Avatar
jcourson jcourson is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Oceanside
Posts: 243
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Feuer, the city attorney, also warned lawmakers against the idea: In a confidential report to the council obtained by The Times earlier this year, he said exempting retired officers would pose "significant legal risk" because it would be hard to show that it was "rationally related to a legitimate state interest."
Wow. Even their attorney told them it was a bad idea.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ant45 View Post
Plenty of people who don't frequent internet forums are blissfully unaware that their guns suck.
Quote:
I don't understand. Is he being forced out for being an ammo-grabbing fascist or for being a failure as an ammo-grabbing fascist?
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-02-2015, 9:12 PM
bernieb90 bernieb90 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 704
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

They don't care, the unions pay for their campaigns. Besides it gives us more reasons why the law is unconstitutional under equal protection.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-02-2015, 11:26 PM
Bhobbs's Avatar
Bhobbs Bhobbs is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Chino CA
Posts: 10,463
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jcourson View Post
Wow. Even their attorney told them it was a bad idea.
It's not really a bad idea. You would still have to convince a court that it was an unconstitutional amendment to the bill.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 12-02-2015, 11:29 PM
LeadFarmer74's Avatar
LeadFarmer74 LeadFarmer74 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: The Serious North Cali
Posts: 1,029
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Just opens it up in the legal system when the case comes up. Gives compelling reason that we all get them or none of us "regular citizens" need them.
__________________
NRA Lifer
Quote:
Originally Posted by Click Boom View Post
I know your ban hammer is cold hammer forged and chrome lined, im not messin with it!
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 12-02-2015, 11:33 PM
enegue enegue is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Culver City, CA
Posts: 412
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LeadFarmer74 View Post
Just opens it up in the legal system when the case comes up. Gives compelling reason that we all get them or none of us "regular citizens" need them.
Yep. Hopefully that's how we can win it in court. Still very much an uphill battle, but maybe the case won't be thrown out by summary judgement.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12-04-2015, 8:46 PM
rodsvet rodsvet is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 50
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

They don't give a chit about regular citizens except at election time.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 12-04-2015, 9:07 PM
jarhead714 jarhead714 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: O.C.
Posts: 2,507
iTrader: 12 / 100%
Default

It's a separate class of citizen. A higher order. Us normal folk will never get their support because the risk of us having what they have and the potential for the prohibited or limited items to be used against their brotherhood far outweighs any benefit of us having said items and being able to protect our own damn selves in the moments before they can actually get there to help us. There is NOTHING to be gained for them. The retirees don't care; too busy planning vacations and cashing checks that get bigger every year, on us, until they die.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 12-05-2015, 12:03 PM
pacrat pacrat is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Socialist Republic of SoCal
Posts: 2,490
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Well OK then, they caved to UNION Pressure. {aka Campaign Donations and StandUp Photo Op support} And allowed Retired and Reserve officer to have high cap mags.

Did they also acquiesce and change the "performance of duty" language? Which disallowed any officer off duty from exemption.

I wonder how this will effect the plaintiffs in "Bosenko v LA" suit?

If it is again legal for Off Duty, Reserve, and Retired officers to have high caps. Will the Sheriffs and Unions plaintiffs vanish. Leaving just a few average citizens to sue the city on their own?

I asked about this contingency in the original Bosenko thread. But never got an answer.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s....php?t=1126745

Quote:
Will these same badge toters turn against us as soon as they are once again Special on the magazine issue?

Will these new found "Enemies of our Enemies" again become just "Enemies"?
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 12-05-2015, 12:35 PM
baggss's Avatar
baggss baggss is offline
Stoopid American Redneck™
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: The Hot part of Ventura County
Posts: 933
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jarhead714 View Post
It's a separate class of citizen. A higher order. Us normal folk will never get their support because the risk of us having what they have and the potential for the prohibited or limited items to be used against their brotherhood far outweighs any benefit of us having said items and being able to protect our own damn selves in the moments before they can actually get there to help us. There is NOTHING to be gained for them. The retirees don't care; too busy planning vacations and cashing checks that get bigger every year, on us, until they die.
This'll be a clear 14th amendment violation and they will lose, even in the 9th. The 9th was pretty clear some years ago when the ruled about this sort of thing and even the CA AG (one Gerry "Moonbeam" Brown) as recent as 2010 wrote an opinion supporting the 9ths decision. Their lawyer is right, and it's going to cost them.
__________________

"The best gun is the one you'll have on you when you need it the most, the one you know how to use, the one that goes BANG every single time you pull the trigger. Wether that gun cost you $349 or $1,100 it's worth every penny if it saves your life, or the life of someone you love.” -Tim Schmit, CCW Magazine July 2015
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 12-05-2015, 12:39 PM
jeffyhog jeffyhog is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Circling the Drain
Posts: 1,382
iTrader: 48 / 100%
Default

Some are more equal than others.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 12-05-2015, 12:42 PM
Baconator's Avatar
Baconator Baconator is offline
Bacon makes it better
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Riverside County
Posts: 9,375
iTrader: 58 / 100%
Default

I really wish there was a mechanism to hold individuals personally liable for violating Constitutional rights. Would make them actually have to think before they act.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 12-05-2015, 1:06 PM
randomBytes's Avatar
randomBytes randomBytes is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 734
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

I wish there were a place you could take disputes, to get abuses of your rights overturned... where justice could be assured.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 12-05-2015, 9:09 PM
Rimfire123 Rimfire123 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 656
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Default

Is there hope that we will win this? because now LEOs may not show any interest in this case now.

thanks
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 12-05-2015, 9:14 PM
CALI-gula's Avatar
CALI-gula CALI-gula is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,415
iTrader: 25 / 100%
Default

Some are more equal than others.




.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 12-09-2015, 10:35 AM
Untamed1972 Untamed1972 is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 16,901
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
In the throes of an attack, "wouldn't you want some guy to stand up with a gun and be able to defend people?" asked Peter Repovich, director of the Los Angeles Police Protective League.
Yes.....I think they would be a great idea! Buy why does it hafta only be a LEO that can do that?
__________________
"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
  #17  
Old 12-10-2015, 5:44 PM
Glock21sfsd Glock21sfsd is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Susanville
Posts: 248
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

"against some of the gun-control activists who had championed the L.A. ban on such ammunition magazines as a way to force attackers to interrupt their rampages sooner to reload."

Some people are plain stupid! If a criminal has an illegal gun are they going to use "LEGAL" magazines? Probably not.
__________________
Jeffery Overman
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 12-10-2015, 5:59 PM
Chunky_lover's Avatar
Chunky_lover Chunky_lover is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: San Diego, Ca
Posts: 1,850
iTrader: 37 / 100%
Default

guess they dont realize a quick trip out of state can get you whatever you want
even better if you use a P.O. Box then get stuff mailed there and pick up later


they should allow everything and do a study for a few years I bet nothing would change
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 12-10-2015, 10:19 PM
Virginian Virginian is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 58
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Baconator View Post
I really wish there was a mechanism to hold individuals personally liable for violating Constitutional rights. Would make them actually have to think before they act.
You mean like a Right to Petition for Redress? Novel thought... maybe we can get an amendment passed.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 12-10-2015, 10:25 PM
Virginian Virginian is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 58
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by randomBytes View Post
I wish there were a place you could take disputes, to get abuses of your rights overturned... where justice could be assured.
Companion piece for the above. Check the history of the right to petition and you'll find it didn't mean a list of signatures to be tossed in the round file.
Somehow we have let a very real process slip away.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 12-11-2015, 9:02 AM
ddestruel ddestruel is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 740
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

I think we’re going to need to attack this as bigger than guns to get our rights back and eliminate exemptions of this sort

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s....php?t=1124628


CA Equal application of the law amendment to state constitution: for state lawmakers, civilians and all civil servants of ca. All laws or ballot measures passed in the state of ca that impact enumerated rights identified in the us constitution (bill of rights) or state constitution must be narrowly tailored when applied to the private law abiding citizens and enforced equally. Laws and policies that affect law abiding citizens as well as items in common use or practice, are to be subject to strict scrutiny review and that civilians and civil servants can not receive exemptions, special privileges ect that are not equally applied and available to all other law abiding citizens. Lawmakers may not exempt themselves nor may they refuse to defend these enumerated rights in court. No portion of this amendment is intended to prevent the state from regulating criminal acts, felons or the mentally ill.


Some battle that avoids the term guns will appeal to the larger public ear and when it concerns or is coined around restricting political favoritism the mind numb voters have been shown to support such things even without understanding its full effect. as a constitutional amendment battle thats the only way it will trump the courts, legislature and ballot measures. obviously courts can try to write it out of existence but if enough legal beagles apply previous judicial wrangling to the writing of this the language avenues that the court might be able to use to fight such an amendment could be narrowed. I think with the recent passing on Friedman our adversaries will be emboldened and we need to start considering an avenue to tie their hands while avoiding the public opinion challenges of it only being about guns.
__________________
NRA Life member, multi organization continued donor etc etc etc
Quote:
....."there can be no irreparable harm to a municipality when it is prevented from enforcing an unconstitutional statute,” and the public interest always weighs in favor of protecting constitutional rights. See Joelner v. Wash. Park, 378 F.3d 613, 620 (7th Cir. 2004).
I VOTE and contribute to organizations who share my pursuit of freedom
1991
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 12-16-2015, 8:03 PM
RRangel RRangel is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Southern California
Posts: 4,974
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Glock21sfsd View Post
"against some of the gun-control activists who had championed the L.A. ban on such ammunition magazines as a way to force attackers to interrupt their rampages sooner to reload."

Some people are plain stupid! If a criminal has an illegal gun are they going to use "LEGAL" magazines? Probably not.
It's simply safer for those that represent feckless astroturf, to attack the law abiding, than it is for them to address the real problem. Which is criminals and their illegal behavior. The political class doesn't want to upset their criminal constituents either.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 12-21-2015, 8:29 AM
Sutcliffe Sutcliffe is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Campbell, CA
Posts: 5,390
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default Tar and Feathering used to be common for that

Quote:
Originally Posted by Baconator View Post
I really wish there was a mechanism to hold individuals personally liable for violating Constitutional rights. Would make them actually have to think before they act.
Maybe we ought to bring it back?
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 01-14-2016, 2:21 PM
wpage's Avatar
wpage wpage is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,905
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

George Orwell certainly was a prophet...
__________________
God so loved the world He gave His only Son... Believe in Him and have everlasting life.
John 3:16

United Air Epic Fail Video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u99Q7pNAjvg
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 01-16-2016, 5:19 PM
Sgt Raven's Avatar
Sgt Raven Sgt Raven is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: 85/101
Posts: 2,692
iTrader: 26 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bhobbs View Post
It's not really a bad idea. You would still have to convince a court that it was an unconstitutional amendment to the bill.
Well that was one of the only good things to come out of Silveira v. Lockyer...
__________________

...... you cant have no idea how little I care "

Monte (Tom Selleck) - 'Monte Walsh'

"It's not always being fast or even accurate that counts, it's being willing. I found out early that most men, regardless of cause or need, aren't willing. They blink an eye or draw a breath before they pull the trigger--and I won't."

John Wayne as John Bernard (J. B.) Books in The Shootist

Last edited by Sgt Raven; 01-16-2016 at 5:34 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 01-16-2016, 9:55 PM
Victor Cachat's Avatar
Victor Cachat Victor Cachat is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,206
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

The proles get nothing in a Communist society.
If you want something, you must become an apparatchik.
__________________
Democrats>Socialists>Communists - Same goals, different speeds.

The most effective and pervasive enemy of American freedoms today is the Legacy Media. Defeat them first.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 01-23-2016, 11:12 AM
The Gleam's Avatar
The Gleam The Gleam is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,096
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s....php?t=1156522

Feds: Possible Fraud Donations to Nury Martinez to get Matching City Campaign Funds

http://www.laobserved.com/archive/20..._small_don.php


Quote:
Some details are getting out about the federal criminal investigation that seems to involve City Councilwoman Nury Martinez and her staff. City Hall reporter David Zahniser reports in the LA Times that at least five East Valley residents who are listed on records as making small campaign donations to Martinez for her 2015 reelection campaign have been contacted by the FBI. Three of the five that Zahniser talked to said they have appeared before a federal grand jury.

But Zahniser says the investigation seems to be focusing on $5 and $10 donations, which helped Martinez qualify for more matching city campaign funds. She submitted the names of about 220 residents in her council district who had supposedly given small donations, a step now required by city ethics rules to enable a campaign to receive matching funds of $2 per donor. But Zahniser found reported donors who said they didn't give anything.
More at the link above....

If you think the above is not a big deal, then here, I have another link for you, courtesy of Nury herself, and LA City Council.

http://clkrep.lacity.org/onlinedocs/...c_08-07-15.pdf

COUNCILMEMBER NURY MARTINEZ was on the "Public Safety" committee that gave this turd her seal of approval from A to Z. Mayor Eric Garcetti signed this ill-conceived and troubling magazine ban into law on August 7, 2015. Maybe Mike Feuer or Garcetti is boinking her... or maybe both as a tag team? Or maybe Gavin Newsom has moved on from his Campaign manager's wife and is fishing in southern waters, and they have a swingin' foursome going on.

Anything is possible.
__________________
-----------------------------------------------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Librarian View Post
What compelling interest has any level of government in knowing what guns are owned by civilians? (Those owned by government should be inventoried and tracked, for exactly the same reasons computers and desks and chairs are tracked: responsible care of public property.)

If some level of government had that information, what would they do with it? How would having that info benefit public safety? How would it benefit law enforcement?
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 01-23-2016, 7:22 PM
King of the 109ers King of the 109ers is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 275
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Regular citizens should be allowed MORE mag cap than TRAINED POLICE OFFICERS since the super cops should be better at using a gun than non-LEO.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 01-24-2016, 12:53 AM
RRangel RRangel is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Southern California
Posts: 4,974
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by King of the 109ers View Post
Regular citizens should be allowed MORE mag cap than TRAINED POLICE OFFICERS since the super cops should be better at using a gun than non-LEO.
The last thing that leftists want to do is empower citizens. They might start demanding, that their representatives, act with competence.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 01-25-2016, 1:38 AM
KingChiron's Avatar
KingChiron KingChiron is offline
Captain of the Gun Boat
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Rampart
Posts: 596
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

hmm... sounds more and more likely that the lawmakers want ordinary citizens to become reserves officers in order to avoid their ban hammer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wpage View Post
George Orwell certainly was a prophet...
Amen.
__________________

*Disclaimer: I'm no lawyer. So don't take my advice as counsel.

"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children what it was once like in the United States where men were free." -Ronald Reagan
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 5:23 PM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, 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.