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 03-15-2013, 7:41 PM
Scarecrow Repair's Avatar
Scarecrow Repair Scarecrow Repair is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Internet Tough Guy(tm), them thar hills
Posts: 2,426
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default Pointless paranoia about the Heller 5 ...

There's a constant theme around these parts that pushing any new pro-gun case to the Supreme Court is fraught with peril because one of the Heller 5 might balk at carry, or worse yet Obama might replace one of them before the case is decided in our favor.

This seems misplaced to me. The hoplophobes would find any excuse to re-open Heller if they got a majority, or to limit carry in NY or some other hoplophobe state, with national ramifications. If any of the Heller 5 are so weak on carry that they would undermine the right to bear arms, the hoplophobes would take advantage of it an a heartbeat.

In other words, sitting still for fear of awakening a sleeping flipflopper would just abandon the playing field to the hoplophobes. Better to strike with a good chance of success than cower in fear and turn over possession.
__________________
Mention the Deacons for Defense and Justice and make both left and right wingnuts squirm
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 03-15-2013, 9:55 PM
CCWFacts CCWFacts is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 5,593
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scarecrow Repair View Post
Better to strike with a good chance of success than cower in fear and turn over possession.
Yes, we need to get this case going as fast as we can. There will never be a better time.
__________________
I will spit whenever I hear the word Libertarian from now on.

In the 2016 election, Libertarian voters threw the swing states of Nevada, Colorado, New Mexico, Minnesota, New Hampshire, and Maine to Hillary, for a total of 38 electoral college votes. Hillary would have created a permanent a permanent entitlement class and permanent Democratic control over the US.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 03-15-2013, 10:22 PM
mdimeo mdimeo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 611
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CCWFacts View Post
There will never be a better time.
absolutely correct.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 03-15-2013, 10:27 PM
rootuser rootuser is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,727
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Hoplophobes, good word. Honestly had to look it up where it came from never knew. I thought it was an actual phobia until just now

I think the trick is to get good cases and good defendants. Heller was perfect because he carried the gun at work but couldn't have it to protect his home. We didn't get Heller by hurrying up and taking un-calculated risk. I know everyone wants changes right now, but it took from over 30 years to finally un-do DCs handgun law. The case itself took 6+ years. Unfortunately patience wins the battles. Even the win that was Heller wasn't perfect.

I don't know about a flip-flopper at this point. It seems unlikely. The court will still find against us if we bring a god awful case.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 03-16-2013, 12:07 AM
1JimMarch 1JimMarch is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,796
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Ginsburg is potentially on our side on carry. See also the quotes in Heller on her own use of the term "bear arms" in a previous case.

Even Kagan is a possibility on our side.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 03-16-2013, 2:06 AM
anthonyca anthonyca is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 5,211
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1JimMarch View Post
Ginsburg is potentially on our side on carry. See also the quotes in Heller on her own use of the term "bear arms" in a previous case.

Even Kagan is a possibility on our side.
I have always been intrigued by Ginsberg's writings on bearing arms and how armour pertains to arms. She understands that and then rules the way she did in Heller and McDonald? That logic is akin to a racist saying, he is a really good guy, but he is still a $#&&@*.
__________________
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Union...70812799700206

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wherryj View Post
I am a physician. I am held to being "the expert" in medicine. I can't fall back on feigned ignorance and the statement that the patient should have known better than I. When an officer "can't be expected to know the entire penal code", but a citizen is held to "ignorance is no excuse", this is equivalent to ME being able to sue my patient for my own malpractice-after all, the patient should have known better, right?
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 03-16-2013, 8:43 AM
speedrrracer speedrrracer is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,981
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1JimMarch View Post
Ginsburg is potentially on our side on carry. See also the quotes in Heller on her own use of the term "bear arms" in a previous case.

Even Kagan is a possibility on our side.
This seems unlikely, to say the least. Why on Earth would they decide we have a right to carry arms in public when they said we don't have a right to keep and bear arms in the first place? (Heller)
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 03-16-2013, 9:54 AM
Goosebrown's Avatar
Goosebrown Goosebrown is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 347
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Now is absolutely the best possible time to get a case before the court.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 03-16-2013, 10:03 AM
njineermike's Avatar
njineermike njineermike is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: CO
Posts: 9,333
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

In what I see, there is less concern one of them will flip than one of them will drop dead and be replaced by another Sotomayor/Kagan clone.
__________________
NRA lifetime member
2AF Defender member

When did I go from being a "citizen" to a "taxpayer"?

Jon Lovitz: ‘I can’t wait to go to a hospital run by the DMV!’

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kestryll View Post
Dude went full CNN...
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 03-16-2013, 11:00 AM
OleCuss OleCuss is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Kalifornia
Posts: 6,232
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1JimMarch View Post
Ginsburg is potentially on our side on carry. See also the quotes in Heller on her own use of the term "bear arms" in a previous case.

Even Kagan is a possibility on our side.
If you are right (and I've learned to respect what you say), then a carry case in the near future could be a far bigger victory than I'd hoped.

Oh, it could actually mean that the language might not be as strong as I might want it to be in order to get Ginsburg and/or Kagan on board, but it would seem to me to make it a bit more likely that stare decisis would be respected in the future.
__________________
CGN's token life-long teetotaling vegetarian. Not qualified to give any legal opinion so pay attention at your own risk.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 03-16-2013, 11:31 AM
Duncan Hines Duncan Hines is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 52
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Mark my words: SCOTUS will either refuse to hear a carry case or rule against it if they do.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 03-16-2013, 11:46 AM
Gray Peterson's Avatar
Gray Peterson Gray Peterson is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lynnwood, WA
Posts: 5,819
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by speedrrracer View Post
This seems unlikely, to say the least. Why on Earth would they decide we have a right to carry arms in public when they said we don't have a right to keep and bear arms in the first place? (Heller)
Kagan was not on the court during Heller or McDonald.

Ginsburg, however, I agree with you.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 03-16-2013, 11:51 AM
Gray Peterson's Avatar
Gray Peterson Gray Peterson is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lynnwood, WA
Posts: 5,819
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Duncan Hines View Post
Mark my words: SCOTUS will either refuse to hear a carry case or rule against it if they do.
And when you are proven wrong, can we expect you to ask forgiveness for spreading fear?
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 03-16-2013, 12:33 PM
Duncan Hines Duncan Hines is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 52
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

And when I am proven right, can I expect all of you (at least I'm in the minority) to ask forgiveness for spreading false hope?
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 03-16-2013, 1:56 PM
sholling's Avatar
sholling sholling is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,246
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scarecrow Repair View Post
There's a constant theme around these parts that pushing any new pro-gun case to the Supreme Court is fraught with peril because one of the Heller 5 might balk at carry, or worse yet Obama might replace one of them before the case is decided in our favor.

This seems misplaced to me. The hoplophobes would find any excuse to re-open Heller if they got a majority, or to limit carry in NY or some other hoplophobe state, with national ramifications. If any of the Heller 5 are so weak on carry that they would undermine the right to bear arms, the hoplophobes would take advantage of it an a heartbeat.

In other words, sitting still for fear of awakening a sleeping flipflopper would just abandon the playing field to the hoplophobes. Better to strike with a good chance of success than cower in fear and turn over possession.
"Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't after you" - original author unknown.

Actually I agree with you - this is the time to take a carry case all the way up and after winning that take a modern sporting rifle/standard capacity magazine ban all the way up to SCOTUS. The time is now to get a strict scrutiny ruling because what happens in 2016 is a crap shoot and waiting just entails too many risks of losing one of the five Heller heros. The real worry now is that the court will just continue refusing to hear any carry cases until it's too late and I have little confidence that they will accept one this year, for sure not enough confidence to lay a bet either way.

Waiting sets us up for only 3 possible scenarios: 1) One of the Heller 5 die before 2016 and Obama appoints a Chuck Schumer type to replace him. Or, 2) Hillary is elected in 2016 and replaces 2 of the Heller 5 plus Breyer and the 2nd Amendment becomes a dead letter. Or, 3) Rand Paul is elected in 2016 and we get a libertarian who replaces 2 of the Heller 5 plus Breyer as they retire and we wind up with a court with 5 libertarian leaning justices, 2 right leaning statists, and 2 left leaning statists.
__________________
"Government is the great fiction, through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else." --FREDERIC BASTIAT--

Proud Life Member: National Rifle Association and the Second Amendment Foundation.

Disappointed Life Member: California Rifle & Pistol Association

Last edited by sholling; 03-16-2013 at 2:37 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 03-16-2013, 1:57 PM
Scarecrow Repair's Avatar
Scarecrow Repair Scarecrow Repair is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Internet Tough Guy(tm), them thar hills
Posts: 2,426
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Folks, I'm not saying we're not in trouble if there's a carry case and one of the Heller 5 drops dead.

I'm saying that's a problem regardless of what cases we bring, because the other side can also bring cases.

In other words, worrying about a Heller 5 death is pointless; no more significant than worrying about how much faster the No. 5 bus runs if the driver had an extra cup of coffee that morning and how that affects their decisions.
__________________
Mention the Deacons for Defense and Justice and make both left and right wingnuts squirm
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 03-16-2013, 2:06 PM
rootuser rootuser is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,727
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scarecrow Repair View Post
Folks, I'm not saying we're not in trouble if there's a carry case and one of the Heller 5 drops dead.

I'm saying that's a problem regardless of what cases we bring, because the other side can also bring cases.

In other words, worrying about a Heller 5 death is pointless; no more significant than worrying about how much faster the No. 5 bus runs if the driver had an extra cup of coffee that morning and how that affects their decisions.
I agree here. I think you're right our focus shouldnt be on those 5 but on the cases themselves.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 03-16-2013, 2:24 PM
speedrrracer speedrrracer is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,981
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scarecrow Repair View Post

I'm saying that's a problem regardless of what cases we bring, because the other side can also bring cases.
I don't see how this is a concern in any way. You understand SCOTUS can only declare laws unconstitutional, right? They can't make laws.

And if you're suggesting the 'other side' is going to somehow appeal some case all the way to SCOTUS, be granted cert, and have the majority opinion worded such that it restricts our rights more than is already the case, I'll suggest you are nuts, because that's like adopting Russian Roulette as your main battle strategy.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 03-16-2013, 2:46 PM
sholling's Avatar
sholling sholling is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,246
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scarecrow Repair View Post
In other words, worrying about a Heller 5 death is pointless; no more significant than worrying about how much faster the No. 5 bus runs if the driver had an extra cup of coffee that morning and how that affects their decisions.
I disagree completely. If we wait until after one of the Heller 5 is replaced by an Obama selection we'll lose every case that comes up. We need to move while the Heller 5 are healthy to give us time to put carry back into culture of all 50 states not just 40 and embed the popularity of carry and modern sporting rifles so deep in the popular culture that no Democrat will dare to propose a ban anywhere in the country for fear of being thrown out of office. To get that done we have to get the court to set favorable precedents while the getting is still possible.
__________________
"Government is the great fiction, through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else." --FREDERIC BASTIAT--

Proud Life Member: National Rifle Association and the Second Amendment Foundation.

Disappointed Life Member: California Rifle & Pistol Association
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 03-16-2013, 4:17 PM
advocatusdiaboli's Avatar
advocatusdiaboli advocatusdiaboli is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Rural Central California
Posts: 5,326
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1JimMarch View Post
Ginsburg is potentially on our side on carry. See also the quotes in Heller on her own use of the term "bear arms" in a previous case.

Even Kagan is a possibility on our side.
I respect your views msot times but you are flat wrong on this. Ginsberg is on record dissing the 2nd:
In a visit to Cairo, Egypt, Justice Ginsburg told Al Hayat television, “I would not look to the U.S. Constitution, if I were drafting a constitution in the year 2012.” Instead, she urged Egyptians to look elsewhere to more modern constitutions in South Africa, Canada, and even the European Convention on Human Rights—they have no Bill of Rights and no RKBA.
Ginsburg told a Harvard Club audience in 2009, she looks forward to the day when a “future, wiser court” overturns 5-4 decisions like Heller.

Kagan is untested in a decision but I don't think she'd have got the nod from Obama if she were not anti-RKBA. This is the same kind of wishful thinking that led some of you to re-elect our gun banner in chief while telling us we had nothing to worry about..
__________________
Benefactor Member NRA, Life Member CRPA, CGN Contributor, US Army Veteran


Not wasting any more time and energy tilting, Don Quixote-like, on a regulatory problem that, constitutionally, should not even exist in a free state.
I cannot change the world unlike my hero Samuel Adams—but I can change my place in it.
Gone fishin' for now and soon gone from California.

Last edited by advocatusdiaboli; 03-16-2013 at 4:23 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 03-16-2013, 7:20 PM
RonnieP's Avatar
RonnieP RonnieP is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,749
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

And if the Supreme Court rules in favor of Registration/Confiscation, will you obey?
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 03-16-2013, 7:39 PM
Paladin's Avatar
Paladin Paladin is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Alameda County
Posts: 7,186
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scarecrow Repair View Post
In other words, sitting still for fear of awakening a sleeping flipflopper would just abandon the playing field to the hoplophobes. Better to strike with a good chance of success than cower in fear and turn over possession.


I was going to use another smilie, but I thought I'd give you the benefit of the doubt....

What in the world are you talking about???

[1] Who's "sitting still"?

[2] Who's "cower[ing] in fear": SAF? Gura? CGF? Gene? Brandon? Gray? NRA? Who???

These guys are filed carry cases as soon as they could (they had good plaintiffs lined up). As far as I can tell, they're all busy as bees moving cases along as fast as the courts allow and when there's a pause there, they're doing other pro-RKBA activities.

Weird post.... SR, bad day yesterday? Bad week? Had something to drink before posting???
__________________
Never mistake being delusional for being optimistic.

220+ examples of CCWs Saving Lives.

KnifeRights.org/images/KRbanner_468x60-1.gif

Last edited by Paladin; 03-17-2013 at 1:54 PM.. Reason: clarity
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 03-16-2013, 8:06 PM
Gray Peterson's Avatar
Gray Peterson Gray Peterson is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lynnwood, WA
Posts: 5,819
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paladin View Post


I was going to use another smilie, but I thought I'd give you the benefit of the doubt....

What in the world are you talking about???

Who's "sitting still"? Who's "cower[ing] in fear"? SAF? Gura? CGF? Gene? Brandon? Gray? NRA? Who???

These guys are filed carry cases as soon as they could (they had good plaintiffs lined up). As far as I can tell, they're all busy as bees moving cases along as fast as the courts allow and when there's a pause there, they're doing other pro-RKBA activities.

Weird post.... SR, bad day yesterday? Bad week? Had something to drink before posting???
I think he's not talking about CGF or NRA. He's talking about regular posters getting all shook up over Roberts & Kennedy. It occurred after NFIB v. Sebelius & it'll likely recur with the June decisions involving gay marriage.

The basis of this is the false belief that those who supposed support 2A must march in lockstep with other so called conservative political positions, & if they deviate from that, it threatens 2A.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 03-17-2013, 1:38 PM
Scarecrow Repair's Avatar
Scarecrow Repair Scarecrow Repair is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Internet Tough Guy(tm), them thar hills
Posts: 2,426
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paladin View Post
Weird post.... SR, bad day yesterday? Bad week? Had something to drink before posting???
No, but in comparison to your post, I thought a long time before writing it.

Maybe you are such an eternal optimist that you haven't noticed all the posts about how dangerous it is to send any case to the Supreme Court. That's what I'm referring to.
__________________
Mention the Deacons for Defense and Justice and make both left and right wingnuts squirm
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 03-17-2013, 1:41 PM
Scarecrow Repair's Avatar
Scarecrow Repair Scarecrow Repair is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Internet Tough Guy(tm), them thar hills
Posts: 2,426
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by speedrrracer View Post
I don't see how this is a concern in any way. You understand SCOTUS can only declare laws unconstitutional, right? They can't make laws.
Did it escape your notice that CCW and open carry and all sorts of pro-gun activity is enabled by laws?

Do you think the hoplophobes are so bereft of brains to think they will never attack those laws?

You underestimate the enemy at everybody's peril.
__________________
Mention the Deacons for Defense and Justice and make both left and right wingnuts squirm
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 03-17-2013, 1:47 PM
Paladin's Avatar
Paladin Paladin is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Alameda County
Posts: 7,186
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scarecrow Repair View Post
No, but in comparison to your post, I thought a long time before writing it.
Really?

If that's the case, then you can easily answer my 2 questions:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paladin View Post

[1] Who's "sitting still"?

[2] Who's "cower[ing] in fear": SAF? Gura? CGF? Gene? Brandon? Gray? NRA? Who???

These guys are filed carry cases as soon as they could (they had good plaintiffs lined up).
__________________
Never mistake being delusional for being optimistic.

220+ examples of CCWs Saving Lives.

KnifeRights.org/images/KRbanner_468x60-1.gif

Last edited by Paladin; 03-17-2013 at 1:53 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 03-17-2013, 9:48 PM
sholling's Avatar
sholling sholling is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,246
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gray Peterson View Post
I think he's not talking about CGF or NRA. He's talking about regular posters getting all shook up over Roberts & Kennedy. It occurred after NFIB v. Sebelius & it'll likely recur with the June decisions involving gay marriage.

The basis of this is the false belief that those who supposed support 2A must march in lockstep with other so called conservative political positions, & if they deviate from that, it threatens 2A.
There was good reason to fear the reliability of those two after the Obamacare ruling. Roberts fell back on his theory that the job of the court is to defer to congress and find any excuse to uphold the constitutionality of any law and in this case he pulled an excuse right out of his butt. He stretched logic further than those that claim the 2nd only applies to muskets which means that his next vote is a crap shoot but we still have to try.
__________________
"Government is the great fiction, through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else." --FREDERIC BASTIAT--

Proud Life Member: National Rifle Association and the Second Amendment Foundation.

Disappointed Life Member: California Rifle & Pistol Association
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 03-17-2013, 10:47 PM
wildhawker's Avatar
wildhawker wildhawker is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: California
Posts: 14,419
iTrader: 84 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1JimMarch View Post
Ginsburg is potentially on our side on carry. See also the quotes in Heller on her own use of the term "bear arms" in a previous case.

Even Kagan is a possibility on our side.
I'd place it at perhaps greater than zero but less than 5% that G or K vote for the majority/plurality in carry. Scalia, in Heller, skewered G with her own words.

-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.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 03-18-2013, 12:03 AM
cr250chevy cr250chevy is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: N/A
Posts: 867
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Default

I agree we need to push cases now; the roster, hi cap magazines- these would be the easiest due to their "common use." Then the "assault weapon" ban here in CA. Next NFA items; SBRs��, suppressors ��, then full autos ��. The time is now. Alright off my hopeful box, going home now.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:37 PM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2016, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.