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.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 12-07-2012, 11:05 AM
Maestro Pistolero's Avatar
Maestro Pistolero Maestro Pistolero is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 3,887
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
I don't believe we should even require a good cause.
Agreed. Once the Heller court effectively detached the militia clause and identified a range of purposes for the right, any lawful purpose whatsoever should be sufficient. There could even be lawful purposes emerge for the first time, and they would covered, because it is the keeping and bearing of objects, and the objects themselves, not a purpose for them which the amendment protects. We would never be required to announce a purpose for any other individual, fundamental right before being granted permission to exercise it.
__________________
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
  #42  
Old 12-07-2012, 11:27 AM
Kestryll's Avatar
Kestryll Kestryll is offline
Head Janitor
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Occupied Reseda, PRK
Posts: 20,066
iTrader: 19 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wash View Post
The problem is sides and the "side" I'm on isn't the one that created these sides.
The funny thing about 'sides' is that they are a recent problem.

In speaking with people who have been fighting this fight for between 2 and 4 decades I hear constantly that there never used to be such major division and angst among 2A supporters and/or organizations.
The concept of 'sides', tearing down the other guy and branding someone who is doing something different than you as 'the enemy' is a new problem in the last 5-7 years or so.

There is a major difference between healthy competition that makes better men out of all involved and destructive competition that requires the death of all other persons or ideas in order to feel that victory has been won.
California 2A politics and activism have devolved in to the latter and some are not only okay with it they are happy about it.
And I don't just mean Sarah Brady.

It all comes down to egos, personalities, power, 'fame' and money.
People can not control the first two and want the last three and that is a damaging combination no matter who's 'side' it on.
__________________
NRA Patron Life Member / CRPA Life Member / SAF Life Member
Calguns.net an incorported entity - President.
The Calguns Shooting Sports Assoc. - Vice President.
DONATE TO NRA-ILA, CGSSA, AND CRPAF NOW!
Opinions posted in this account are my own and unless specifically stated as such are not the approved position of Calguns.net, CGSSA or CGF.
  #43  
Old 12-07-2012, 11:31 AM
Glock22Fan's Avatar
Glock22Fan Glock22Fan is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Los Angeles County
Posts: 5,752
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by taperxz View Post
You do realize that a super majority of CA Sheriffs issue don't you?
They tend to be the sheriffs in the low population areas. The vast majority of us are not able to take advantage of that. Just consider, the population of S.F. and the Bay area, plus San Diego, plus Los Angeles and you are already probably up to over half the population of California (I'm guessing).

I'd say, rather, a super majority of the population are not in areas where issue is likely, which to me trumps your statement hands down.
__________________
John -- bitter gun owner.

All opinions expressed here are my own unless I say otherwise.
I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice.

  #44  
Old 12-07-2012, 11:35 AM
POLICESTATE's Avatar
POLICESTATE POLICESTATE is online now
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Sunnyvale, PRK
Posts: 17,839
iTrader: 25 / 100%
Default

First they came for the machine guns
But I didn't stand up because I didn't have a machine gun

Then they came for the sound suppressors
But I didn't stand up because I didn't have a sound suppressor

Then they came for the short-barreled rifles and shotguns
But I didn't stand up because I didn't have a short-barreled rifle or shotgun

Then they came for the so-called assault rifles
But I didn't stand up because I didn't have a so-called assault rifle

Then they came for the shoulder things that go up
But I didn't stand up because I didn't have a shoulder thing that goes up

Then they came for pistols and revolvers that are unsafe
But I didn't stand up because I didn't have a pistol or revolver that was unsafe

Then they came for the repeating rifles and pistols
But I didn't stand up because by that point I had sold mine to feed my family after the economy crashed

Then they came for the muzzleloaders
And there was no one left to stand up for me
__________________
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face — forever.


Government Official Lies
. F r e e d o m . D i e s .
  #45  
Old 12-07-2012, 12:04 PM
tcrpe's Avatar
tcrpe tcrpe is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Bakersfield, California
Posts: 10,272
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

I guess any time large sums of money are moving, there are gonna be turf wars.

Human nature includes greed and lust for power.
  #46  
Old 12-07-2012, 12:19 PM
IVC's Avatar
IVC IVC is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Temecula
Posts: 9,504
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by POLICESTATE View Post
I don't believe we should even require a good cause.
Agreed, but you have to put it into context of the assertion The Shadow was making that legislators will try to close it as a "loophole".

There are two potential good outcomes: (1) good cause/good moral character are stricken as unconstitutional; (2) they both stay, but are defined objectively and trivially as "self defense" and "not prohibited."

Outcome (1) is what we would ultimately want, as it would preclude legislators from revisiting the issue. However, outcome (2) is not bad either, since it works within the existing framework, but achieves essentially the same goal.

Further, outcome (2) is not only good as a starting point, but it also prevents "stirring of the hornets nest" by keeping Feinstein's pet gun control talking point intact, thus being unlikely to trigger any serious discussion or action in Sacramento. Even if legislators wanted to act upon it, they would at that time already have their "local LEO knows best." Also, it is very hard to define "morality" and "good cause" in a way that is clean, yet bypasses a ruling of type (2).
__________________
NRA Benefactor Member

Last edited by IVC; 12-07-2012 at 12:21 PM..
  #47  
Old 12-07-2012, 12:21 PM
hornswaggled's Avatar
hornswaggled hornswaggled is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,653
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

I support CGF. They are the powerhouse for CA gun rights. I don't see the NRA or any other law offices saying, "Get arrested for a bullet button? Hit us up!" They do CA gun laws exclusively and have a plan. Sorry, but other bodies should defer to CGF when the cases are here.
__________________
NRA Endowment Member
SAF Defender's Club
  #48  
Old 12-07-2012, 12:30 PM
wildhawker's Avatar
wildhawker wildhawker is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: California
Posts: 14,407
iTrader: 84 / 100%
Default

Kes, the people you've been listening to are the reason we're here. If losing works for you, please take their advice. You definitely seem to have a knack for hitching your wagon to, erm, those who don't know how to win.
  #49  
Old 12-07-2012, 12:36 PM
hawk1's Avatar
hawk1 hawk1 is offline
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Southern California
Posts: 7,590
iTrader: 80 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wildhawker View Post
Kes, the people you've been listening to are the reason we're here. If losing works for you, please take their advice. You definitely seem to have a knack for hitching your wagon to, erm, those who don't know how to win.
Wow, to be that bitter and rude, maybe you shouldn't use his resources and just move on?...
__________________
NRA LIFE MEMBER
  #50  
Old 12-07-2012, 12:48 PM
wildhawker's Avatar
wildhawker wildhawker is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: California
Posts: 14,407
iTrader: 84 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hawk1 View Post
Wow, to be that bitter and rude, maybe you shouldn't use his resources and just move on?...
Do you mean the community's bulletin board or the web property that I and others invested in and helped develop into what it is?

If he wants me to not use CGN he can always, you know, deny me access.

-Brandon
__________________
Brandon Combs

I do not read private messages, and my inbox is usually full. If you need to reach me, please email me instead.

My comments are not the official position or a statement of any organization unless stated otherwise. My comments are not legal advice; if you want or need legal advice, hire a lawyer.
  #51  
Old 12-07-2012, 1:01 PM
POLICESTATE's Avatar
POLICESTATE POLICESTATE is online now
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Sunnyvale, PRK
Posts: 17,839
iTrader: 25 / 100%
Default

Well let's not all turn on each other. I think we all agree the NRA isn't doing much about California and to some extent I can't blame them. From there point of view California is a lost cause, legislatively speaking . Would be nice if they helped with legal challenges though, but they strike me as a "my way or the highway" kind of bunch.

Regardless, we have enough enemies in the gun-grabber and anti-liberty crowds as it is, we certainly don't need to break into factions at this point, that's exactly what the Brady Bunch, LCAV, and the lunatics in Sacramento would love to see happen.
__________________
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face — forever.


Government Official Lies
. F r e e d o m . D i e s .

Last edited by POLICESTATE; 12-07-2012 at 2:22 PM..
  #52  
Old 12-07-2012, 1:02 PM
hawk1's Avatar
hawk1 hawk1 is offline
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Southern California
Posts: 7,590
iTrader: 80 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wildhawker View Post
Do you mean the community's bulletin board or the web property that I and others invested in and helped develop into what it is?

If he wants me to not use CGN he can always, you know, deny me access.

-Brandon
So you're claiming part ownership or was some interest given to you?
I don't recall the community claiming ownership. I'm certain that admin wouldn't give away part of his company just because a group claimed ownership...

I'm surprised you haven't been banned already for attacking other members or the admin himself...

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...ad.php?t=50701
2) Political discussion is welcome, partisan bickering and insults are not.
7) Outright insults, name calling, denigrating comments and ‘baiting’ is not allowed.

omments of this nature are not allowed, if you do not like someone simply do not post in their thread. This rule applies regardless of the root cause, be it religion, orientation or something specific to the individual. This does not refer to joking, ribbing or friendly teasing; these are things friends do. Neither does this rule give anyone free rein to be obnoxious and claim it as a specific trait. This rule refers to comments and post intended solely to offend, antagonize or hurt. If a trend appears of repeatedly posting not to add to the thread but to antagonize a particular member it will result in first a warning, then time off and finally closure of the account.
__________________
NRA LIFE MEMBER

Last edited by hawk1; 12-07-2012 at 1:06 PM..
  #53  
Old 12-07-2012, 1:21 PM
wildhawker's Avatar
wildhawker wildhawker is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: California
Posts: 14,407
iTrader: 84 / 100%
Default

Hawk1, Google search is your friend.
  #54  
Old 12-07-2012, 1:47 PM
M. D. Van Norman's Avatar
M. D. Van Norman M. D. Van Norman is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: California refugee
Posts: 4,168
iTrader: 19 / 100%
Default

[sigh] As I’ve said before, revolutions are difficult to manage. Now, feel free to carry on with the bickering.
__________________
Matthew D. Van Norman
Dancing Giant Sales | Licensed Firearms Dealer | Rainier, WA
  #55  
Old 12-07-2012, 1:47 PM
Ryan_D's Avatar
Ryan_D Ryan_D is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Atwater
Posts: 195
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

This issue was discussed somewhat at yesterday's oral arguments, when the Panel asked whether they should remand based on the notification issue. Other counsel stated that under statute, sheriffs are considered to be state actors for purposes of notification, so they were not seeking a remand either.

Publicly casting stones is in very poor taste.
__________________
Smith & Wesson M&P Shield .40 S&W -- Ruger LC9 -- Spikes Tactical ST-15 16" .223/5.56 NATO -- Ruger American 30-06 -- Taurus Raging Bull 6.5" .44 Magnum
"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act."-George Orwell
"You can lead a man to Congress, but you can't make him think."-Milton Berle
"Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself."-Mark Twain
"Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely."-Lord Acton
  #56  
Old 12-07-2012, 2:04 PM
FABIO GETS GOOSED!!!'s Avatar
FABIO GETS GOOSED!!! FABIO GETS GOOSED!!! is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Beverly Hills, California
Posts: 2,572
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan_D View Post
This issue was discussed somewhat at yesterday's oral arguments, when the Panel asked whether they should remand based on the notification issue.
Did the panel specifically say "remand" in the context of the notice issue? If so, can you point me to the point in the audio where they said that?

Last edited by FABIO GETS GOOSED!!!; 12-07-2012 at 3:08 PM..
  #57  
Old 12-07-2012, 2:06 PM
OleCuss OleCuss is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Kalifornia
Posts: 6,056
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

This thread is unnecessarily nasty.

There can be misunderstandings and differences of opinions, but if we are fighting amongst ourselves instead of fighting for our freedom - we may have a screw loose.

I personally believe that every member of the CGF board is devoted to liberty. I believe the same of SAF and of the NRA and of Chuck Michel's group. I salute them all and respect them all.

There may be reasons for differences of opinion and even hard feelings. But we're gonna have to figure out how to get past all that and come to an agreement or agreements to work together in a coordinated fashion or we are going to be in a world of hurt.
__________________
CGN's token life-long teetotaling vegetarian. Not qualified to give any legal opinion so pay attention at your own risk.
  #58  
Old 12-07-2012, 2:14 PM
speedrrracer speedrrracer is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,474
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FABIO GETS GOOSED!!! View Post
Did the penal specifically say "remand" in the context of the notice issue? If so, can you point me to the point in the audio where they said that?
I thought they did, too, but maybe my non-legally trained ears heard wrong or I'm just remembering incorrectly and a different word was used.

Thought it was "remand", tho...
__________________
  #59  
Old 12-07-2012, 2:28 PM
Kestryll's Avatar
Kestryll Kestryll is offline
Head Janitor
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Occupied Reseda, PRK
Posts: 20,066
iTrader: 19 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wildhawker View Post
Kes, the people you've been listening to are the reason we're here. If losing works for you, please take their advice. You definitely seem to have a knack for hitching your wagon to, erm, those who don't know how to win.
Interesting.

You do know some of those people are the same ones that you've personally endorsed for the NRA Board of Directors, the same ones that have been here on CGN since before you ever heard of it and the same people who have been working in Sacramento and learning what works and what doesn't over the course of decades right/

Suddenly they are the 'enemy' and know so much less than you?
Wow.



Quote:
Originally Posted by wildhawker View Post
If he wants me to not use CGN he can always, you know, deny me access.

-Brandon
You know the rules, keep it civil and on topic and it's all good.
If you want to post here follow the basic rules, if you don't say the word and I'll lock your account. Not delete, lock.
Like anyone else you're the one who makes the decisions I just flip the switches.




Quote:
Originally Posted by POLICESTATE View Post
Well let's not all turn on each other.
Unfortunately this is the pattern, if you disagree, if you don't march in lockstep, if you dare to have an opinion of your own you are immediately branded as 'the enemy'.
There is no room for people who don't accept or at least acquiesce to having someone else decide your opinion for you.

Earlier this year I differed with several of my fellow CGF Directors on the CRPA and my decision not to resign when told to.
Rather than accept that we had different opinions Brandon's response via email was to SWEAR that he would get me removed from the CGF Board of Directors.
There has been no effort to do so as of yet but the emotional outburst and declaration is unfortunately the norm ad why there is so much animosity and conflict among people and organizations.




Quote:
Originally Posted by hawk1 View Post
So you're claiming part ownership or was some interest given to you?
I don't recall the community claiming ownership. I'm certain that admin wouldn't give away part of his company just because a group claimed ownership...
What Brandon is claiming is two-fold.

Number one is the aspect that like any forum the growth is largely attributable to the membership and their interactions.
Like many others Brandon has made contributions to the growth of the Calguns community and like most this gives the feel of it being 'my forum'.


Number two I suspect is the feeling of being 'owed'.
About three to three and a half years ago, well before Gunpal/Gpal ever existed, I went to Ben Cannon looking for advice on how to incorporate Calguns.net as a means of protecting my personal assets.
He suggested that in addition to incorporation I also look at creating a Board of Directors. Feeling that Ben had more experience and knowledge regarding running a business then I did I agreed to test drive the BoD concept with Ben and at Ben's suggestion Brandon. I added Ivan in as well since I trust him completely.

The short version of the test BoD is this, there were three differing ideas of where to take Calguns.net from that point and being completely honest I was so used to making the decisions and not having to confer with anyone I couldn't work well in that kind of arrangement so the test BoD was dissolved.
No paperwork was ever filed and no percentage of ownership ever traded hands.

Since that time there have been at least a couple of attempts to convince or cajole me in to turning ownership of CGN over to CGF and at least one offer to buy it from Brandon's new employer SAF.



Quote:
Originally Posted by hawk1 View Post
I'm surprised you haven't been banned already for attacking other members or the admin himself...

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...ad.php?t=50701
2) Political discussion is welcome, partisan bickering and insults are not.
7) Outright insults, name calling, denigrating comments and ‘baiting’ is not allowed.

omments of this nature are not allowed, if you do not like someone simply do not post in their thread. This rule applies regardless of the root cause, be it religion, orientation or something specific to the individual. This does not refer to joking, ribbing or friendly teasing; these are things friends do. Neither does this rule give anyone free rein to be obnoxious and claim it as a specific trait. This rule refers to comments and post intended solely to offend, antagonize or hurt. If a trend appears of repeatedly posting not to add to the thread but to antagonize a particular member it will result in first a warning, then time off and finally closure of the account.
I would be lying if I didn't acknowledge that I have allowed greater latitude regarding this rule to Brandon given his position as a CGF Director then I would others. In part because he does put forward good information at times and effort and in part because I try to question my own motives because I do not want my actions clouded by personal feelings.




The bottom line is simple, there is a lot of unnecessary angst, infighting and internecine warfare that does nothing good for anyone.
If we can not all learn to play together at least we should learn to play without stabbing each other.
__________________
NRA Patron Life Member / CRPA Life Member / SAF Life Member
Calguns.net an incorported entity - President.
The Calguns Shooting Sports Assoc. - Vice President.
DONATE TO NRA-ILA, CGSSA, AND CRPAF NOW!
Opinions posted in this account are my own and unless specifically stated as such are not the approved position of Calguns.net, CGSSA or CGF.
  #60  
Old 12-07-2012, 2:45 PM
RMP91's Avatar
RMP91 RMP91 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: San Carlos
Posts: 3,661
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

I'll be honest, I don't know why you guys are arguing and fighting each other so needlessly.

This is exactly what the antis' want us to do so they can win: in-fighting will eventually ruin everything we've worked hard for and even shed blood towards...

We're all here for a reason, to regain rights that were taken from us via the Legislative and Judicial processes. Let's focus on that instead of bickering amongst ourselves and calling high ranking members of CGF names or claiming they are wrong...

Sometimes, I think we, ourselves are a far worse enemy to our rights than the antis...
__________________
Do what all great men would do: Tuck your head between your legs and kiss your *** goodbye. -Jake71

There's lots of players on the team. Not everyone gets to play "Quarterback". -CEDaytonaRydr
  #61  
Old 12-07-2012, 2:54 PM
Kestryll's Avatar
Kestryll Kestryll is offline
Head Janitor
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Occupied Reseda, PRK
Posts: 20,066
iTrader: 19 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RMP91 View Post
I'll be honest, I don't know why you guys are arguing and fighting each other so needlessly.

Got me, I've said repeatedly that it does nothing but cause strife and division among ourselves and gleeful laughter among our opponents.

But for some reason the shots, digs and insults keep coming.




Let's focus on that instead of bickering amongst ourselves and calling high ranking members of CGF names or claiming they are wrong...
That's a great idea, but it's got to apply to everyone.
And so far that's not the case.





Sometimes, I think we, ourselves are a far worse enemy to our rights than the antis...
Definitely.
__________________
NRA Patron Life Member / CRPA Life Member / SAF Life Member
Calguns.net an incorported entity - President.
The Calguns Shooting Sports Assoc. - Vice President.
DONATE TO NRA-ILA, CGSSA, AND CRPAF NOW!
Opinions posted in this account are my own and unless specifically stated as such are not the approved position of Calguns.net, CGSSA or CGF.
  #62  
Old 12-07-2012, 3:45 PM
aklover_91 aklover_91 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Livermore, CA
Posts: 809
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

I'm more of a lurker than a poster, and I generally try to steer clear of these threads, but I've been keeping up on 'the fight' for a few years now; I really don't like the turn things have been taking.

What I saw when I first started watching, was an admittedly 'spirited' movement. That's fine. I want people to have energy in a fight this important.

What concerns me though, is in the last couple years, as soon as we started to finally take some ground, is things started to get down right nasty; publicly at that.

I am admittedly a very small player, but I follow what's what, toss a couple bucks in the hat when I can, and try to keep as many people as I can informed. I'm fighting in the few little ways I can, and I feel terrible when I see the Generals of our movement act as acidic towards each other as they have been recently.

If it makes me, and others, on our side worry this much imagine how it looks to our opposition? I'm not naive, there are going to be disagreements.

They should, though, be kept behind closed doors. How are we supposed to win if an illusion of a unified front can't even be maintained?
  #63  
Old 12-07-2012, 3:53 PM
RMP91's Avatar
RMP91 RMP91 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: San Carlos
Posts: 3,661
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aklover_91 View Post
I'm more of a lurker than a poster, and I generally try to steer clear of these threads, but I've been keeping up on 'the fight' for a few years now; I really don't like the turn things have been taking.

What I saw when I first started watching, was an admittedly 'spirited' movement. That's fine. I want people to have energy in a fight this important.

What concerns me though, is in the last couple years, as soon as we started to finally take some ground, is things started to get down right nasty; publicly at that.

I am admittedly a very small player, but I follow what's what, toss a couple bucks in the hat when I can, and try to keep as many people as I can informed. I'm fighting in the few little ways I can, and I feel terrible when I see the Generals of our movement act as acidic towards each other as they have been recently.

If it makes me, and others, on our side worry this much imagine how it looks to our opposition? I'm not naive, there are going to be disagreements.

They should, though, be kept behind closed doors. How are we supposed to win if an illusion of a unified front can't even be maintained?
And that, right there is the problem we face within our ranks...

We need not divide, we need to unify!
__________________
Do what all great men would do: Tuck your head between your legs and kiss your *** goodbye. -Jake71

There's lots of players on the team. Not everyone gets to play "Quarterback". -CEDaytonaRydr
  #64  
Old 12-07-2012, 3:53 PM
Meplat's Avatar
Meplat Meplat is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Fresno, CA
Posts: 6,919
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Glock22Fan View Post
They tend to be the sheriffs in the low population areas. The vast majority of us are not able to take advantage of that. Just consider, the population of S.F. and the Bay area, plus San Diego, plus Los Angeles and you are already probably up to over half the population of California (I'm guessing).

I'd say, rather, a super majority of the population are not in areas where issue is likely, which to me trumps your statement hands down.


And most of us in, less than sardine packed, CA would be just fine if thouse supermajority population centers would just fall off into the sea!
__________________
Take not lightly liberty
To have it you must live it
And like love, don't you see
To keep it you must give it

"I will talk with you no more.
I will go now, and fight you."
(Red Cloud)
  #65  
Old 12-07-2012, 4:01 PM
Meplat's Avatar
Meplat Meplat is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Fresno, CA
Posts: 6,919
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FABIO GETS GOOSED!!! View Post
Did the panel specifically say "remand" in the context of the notice issue? If so, can you point me to the point in the audio where they said that?
Yes the pannel did. and I'm not your clerk. If you wat to discuss orals listen to them!
__________________
Take not lightly liberty
To have it you must live it
And like love, don't you see
To keep it you must give it

"I will talk with you no more.
I will go now, and fight you."
(Red Cloud)
  #66  
Old 12-07-2012, 4:10 PM
Paul S's Avatar
Paul S Paul S is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Fresno, CA
Posts: 1,780
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RMP91 View Post
I'll be honest, I don't know why you guys are arguing and fighting each other so needlessly.

This is exactly what the antis' want us to do so they can win: in-fighting will eventually ruin everything we've worked hard for and even shed blood towards...

We're all here for a reason, to regain rights that were taken from us via the Legislative and Judicial processes. Let's focus on that instead of bickering amongst ourselves and calling high ranking members of CGF names or claiming they are wrong...

Sometimes, I think we, ourselves are a far worse enemy to our rights than the antis...
"We have met the enemy and he is us."

Pogo (created by Art Kelly)
__________________
Paul S
“Cogito, ergo armatum sum: I think, therefore I am armed.” - Collection of Quotes - Lt. Col. Dave Grossman
  #67  
Old 12-07-2012, 4:12 PM
Glock22Fan's Avatar
Glock22Fan Glock22Fan is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Los Angeles County
Posts: 5,752
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Meplat View Post
And most of us in, less than sardine packed, CA would be just fine if thouse supermajority population centers would just fall off into the sea!
Well, now I know, you want me to go and drown myself, and take a bunch of other urban Calguns members with me. Maybe that would make it easier for you, but I think gives a good illustration as to why we are all at loggerheads.

We grumble because some out of staters won't support California gun owners because they live in California, which they dislike, now we discover that some Californian gun owners won't support other Californian gun owners because they live in urban areas, which they dislike. Bloody insular thinking.

Color me disgusted by this attitude.
__________________
John -- bitter gun owner.

All opinions expressed here are my own unless I say otherwise.
I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice.

  #68  
Old 12-07-2012, 4:18 PM
FABIO GETS GOOSED!!!'s Avatar
FABIO GETS GOOSED!!! FABIO GETS GOOSED!!! is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Beverly Hills, California
Posts: 2,572
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

meplat, I did listen and the panel did not say "remand," which is not at all surprising since there was zero chance the panel would do that on account of 2403 / 5.1.
  #69  
Old 12-07-2012, 4:29 PM
OleCuss OleCuss is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Kalifornia
Posts: 6,056
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Glock22Fan View Post
Well, now I know, you want me to go and drown myself, and take a bunch of other urban Calguns members with me. Maybe that would make it easier for you, but I think gives a good illustration as to why we are all at loggerheads.

We grumble because some out of staters won't support California gun owners because they live in California, which they dislike, now we discover that some Californian gun owners won't support other Californian gun owners because they live in urban areas, which they dislike. Bloody insular thinking.

Color me disgusted by this attitude.
I don't think you should have been taking him quite that seriously. I'm pretty sure he was not seriously wishing massive death and destruction upon our urban centers.

But those who are pro-liberty need to take a page from Ronald Reagan. I think he said something like, "Speak no ill of a Republican."

I'm not proposing we make Republicans sacrosanct, but maybe our criticisms of those who are fighting the good fight should not question the moral rectitude or the motives of those who are pro-liberty. Disagreeing on tactics and strategy is likely unavoidable but needs to be minimized. People from the major groups should be meeting regularly and coordinating to the extent possible.
__________________
CGN's token life-long teetotaling vegetarian. Not qualified to give any legal opinion so pay attention at your own risk.
  #70  
Old 12-07-2012, 4:43 PM
speedrrracer speedrrracer is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,474
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FABIO GETS GOOSED!!! View Post
meplat, I did listen and the panel did not say "remand," which is not at all surprising since there was zero chance the panel would do that on account of 2403 / 5.1.
I will re-listen to this since I was one of those who thought they did say remand. What word did they use, and what are the legal differences?
__________________
  #71  
Old 12-07-2012, 4:51 PM
stix213's Avatar
stix213 stix213 is offline
AKA: Joe Censored
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: San Rafael
Posts: 16,536
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

Man everyone calm down. What is done is done, this case is still in motion, etc. How about everyone continue to disagree with how things are done, don't remain silent of course, feel free to let your disagreement known as always.... but lets try to keep these disagreements more to constructive criticism. That includes the OP. People will make mistakes, including the NRA, and people being people the CGF and SAF aren't immune from making a mistake as well.

Also, everyone try not to get so bent out of shape when "your side" is the object of some criticism.
__________________
Support my Steam Greenlight campaign for Omega Reaction!
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfile.../?id=618002901

Just vote Yes please, not asking for money.
  #72  
Old 12-07-2012, 4:53 PM
taperxz taperxz is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Lake County
Posts: 14,891
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Glock22Fan View Post
They tend to be the sheriffs in the low population areas. The vast majority of us are not able to take advantage of that. Just consider, the population of S.F. and the Bay area, plus San Diego, plus Los Angeles and you are already probably up to over half the population of California (I'm guessing).

I'd say, rather, a super majority of the population are not in areas where issue is likely, which to me trumps your statement hands down.
Please! don't take my post out of context! I replied to another poster stating that most of the LE in this state don't issue. My statement was that most LE in this state do issue by a super majority. I think it is irrelevant that those that don't are in higher populated areas.

My point being that a sheriff is a sheriff and elected by individual counties. If you put them all in one room and they voted to issue or not in this state the vote would be overwhelmingly to issue to all citizens.
  #73  
Old 12-07-2012, 5:06 PM
Meplat's Avatar
Meplat Meplat is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Fresno, CA
Posts: 6,919
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mike_schwartz@mail.com View Post
I am not looking for this to be an “I told you so” post. However, Gene Hoffman is generally considered a leader on this site and his behavior was inexcusable in his recent Peruta post.

Gene…know your friends, know your enemies, know the difference. –Joel Friedman (Joel may not have made it up, but he said it the first time I heard it and it was in reference to the gun community so I credit him when I steal it.)

Oral arguments for Peruta: http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/media/vi..._id=0000010109


Will you just…

STOP!


I had hoped that when we got past orals this $#!t would go away! No luck. As one who has been a life member of the NRA for half a century I Have watched it spend so much time tripping over its own dick that it couldn’t get out of its own way! I have also seen Gene Hoffman state that; “It is never OK not to be an NRA member”.

Now, It may well be that NRA deserves accolades for charging in and cleaning up the hopeless mess that was Peruta. But I also heard their (OUR?, as I am backing both horses) council almost stutter as he backed away from the panel’s question about remand and pointed out that it was not needed because the sheriff was a state actor. In fact I heard that dirty little “R” word issue forth from the bench more than once. This case is not decided, we are not out of the woods yet!

So, Please, let us pull our skid marked BVD’s off the signal lanyard. Take all our egos and stuff um where the sun don’t shine; AND…..

S.T.F.U.
__________________
Take not lightly liberty
To have it you must live it
And like love, don't you see
To keep it you must give it

"I will talk with you no more.
I will go now, and fight you."
(Red Cloud)
  #74  
Old 12-07-2012, 5:11 PM
taperxz taperxz is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Lake County
Posts: 14,891
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Without the NRA regardless of how people feel about their court dealings, Congress past and present would walk all over the 2A and YOUR gun rights in this country. BOTTOM LINE!
  #75  
Old 12-07-2012, 5:13 PM
FABIO GETS GOOSED!!!'s Avatar
FABIO GETS GOOSED!!! FABIO GETS GOOSED!!! is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Beverly Hills, California
Posts: 2,572
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by speedrrracer View Post
What word did they use, and what are the legal differences?
Callahan asked Gura whether the state should be a party, it was Gura who replied by launching into an explanation why there was no need to remand. Remand would mean vacating the judgment and there was not the slightest inkling in the oral argument the panel was thinking about doing that because of any failure to notify the AG. Again, no surprise. Callahan even cut Gura off during his explanation and moved on to something else. One option under 28 USC 2403 would be to invite the AG to move to intervene as a party to the appeal; O'Scannlain's comments (forgot whether in Richards or Peruta) suggest that is what the panel had in mind.
  #76  
Old 12-07-2012, 5:18 PM
FABIO GETS GOOSED!!!'s Avatar
FABIO GETS GOOSED!!! FABIO GETS GOOSED!!! is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Beverly Hills, California
Posts: 2,572
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Meplat View Post
[CENTER]But I also heard their (OUR?, as I am backing both horses) council almost stutter as he backed away from the panel’s question about remand and pointed out that it was not needed because the sheriff was a state actor. In fact I heard that dirty little “R” word issue forth from the bench more than once. This case is not decided, we are not out of the woods yet!
Where did this happen in the audio? I heard the panel talking about remand for other reasons but not the AG notice. Saying listen to the audio is no answer, if you say it's there, point it out.
  #77  
Old 12-07-2012, 5:19 PM
Meplat's Avatar
Meplat Meplat is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Fresno, CA
Posts: 6,919
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Glock22Fan View Post
Well, now I know, you want me to go and drown myself, and take a bunch of other urban Calguns members with me. Maybe that would make it easier for you, but I think gives a good illustration as to why we are all at loggerheads.

We grumble because some out of staters won't support California gun owners because they live in California, which they dislike, now we discover that some Californian gun owners won't support other Californian gun owners because they live in urban areas, which they dislike. Bloody insular thinking.

Color me disgusted by this attitude.

I apologize if I offended your delicate sensibilities. How about we just float’um around the horn and attach’um to long island.
__________________
Take not lightly liberty
To have it you must live it
And like love, don't you see
To keep it you must give it

"I will talk with you no more.
I will go now, and fight you."
(Red Cloud)
  #78  
Old 12-07-2012, 5:21 PM
sandman21's Avatar
sandman21 sandman21 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,144
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by taperxz View Post
Without the NRA regardless of how people feel about their court dealings, Congress past and present would walk all over the 2A and YOUR gun rights in this country. BOTTOM LINE!
Right...............................History is wrong...................
  #79  
Old 12-07-2012, 5:36 PM
taperxz taperxz is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Lake County
Posts: 14,891
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sandman21 View Post
Right...............................History is wrong...................
LOL so.... what do you attribute the rest of the country having the most liberal gun rights the country has seen since the 1800's? Fantasy world? Tell me what org. has done more in this country. NRA is made of of millions of Americans who donate money!! Money talks and your whatever walks.
  #80  
Old 12-07-2012, 5:40 PM
gundad's Avatar
gundad gundad is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Camarillo
Posts: 484
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

This is painful watching those I consider leaders argue, its almost like watching parents fight. I hope this is just a working dynamic you share and get over.
I just found some old school work from 1988 and it was a report on gun control i wrote that hightlighted all the bad things that could happen to our 2a rights. A lot of those bad things happened. I'm not that smart and not a lawyer so Im counting on those of you who are smart and are lawyers to do the right thing for our 2a rights.
__________________
The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing

Closed Thread

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 12:52 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.