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
  #321  
Old 12-16-2013, 1:07 PM
Paladin's Avatar
Paladin Paladin is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SFBA
Posts: 9,324
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hoffmang View Post
He will file. Peña oral arguments are Monday which gives some insight into the timing here.

-Gene
Look forward to listening to audio from today (if/when available).
__________________
Never mistake being delusional for being optimistic.

230+ examples of CCWs Saving Lives.

KnifeRights.org/images/KRbanner_468x60-1.gif
Reply With Quote
  #322  
Old 12-16-2013, 1:54 PM
fizux's Avatar
fizux fizux is offline
Senior Member
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 1,541
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paladin View Post
Look forward to listening to audio from today (if/when available).
I just checked PACER, nothing yet. It usually takes a few days for something to get entered in the docket about a hearing being conducted; a decision is likely to take longer.

Since this is a trial court hearing, I am not expecting audio to be posted.
__________________
Nationwide Master List of Current 2A Cases, courtesy of Al Norris @ TFL.

Reloading Clubs: SF, East Bay

Case Status: Peña v. Cid (Handgun Roster). SF v. 44Mag (Mag Parts Kits). Bauer v. Harris (DROS Fees). Davis v. LA (CCW policy). Jackson v. SF (Ammo/Storage). Teixeira (FFL Zoning). First Unitarian v. NSA (Privacy). Silvester (Waiting Period). Schoepf (DROS Delay). Haynie (AW ban). SFVPOA v. SF (10+ mag possession ban). Bear in Public: Drake (3CA); Moore (7CA); Richards, Peruta, McKay (9CA).
Reply With Quote
  #323  
Old 12-16-2013, 6:17 PM
ddestruel ddestruel is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 855
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fizux View Post
I just checked PACER, nothing yet. It usually takes a few days for something to get entered in the docket about a hearing being conducted; a decision is likely to take longer.

Since this is a trial court hearing, I am not expecting audio to be posted.
if no audio anyone have a play by play?
__________________
NRA Life member, multi organization continued donor etc etc etc
Reply With Quote
  #324  
Old 12-16-2013, 9:11 PM
hoffmang's Avatar
hoffmang hoffmang is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Peninsula, Bay Area
Posts: 18,448
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

Orals were today. There will not be a transcript or audio from them. My summary should be on the blog shortly and Brandon or I will cross post it once it's up.

-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
  #325  
Old 12-16-2013, 11:01 PM
Blackhawk556's Avatar
Blackhawk556 Blackhawk556 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: FresNO, Ca
Posts: 3,904
iTrader: 17 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hoffmang View Post
Orals were today. There will not be a transcript or audio from them. My summary should be on the blog shortly and Brandon or I will cross post it once it's up.

-Gene





which blog would that be?








Sent from my Lumia 1520 using Tapatalk
__________________
CZ 75 SP-01 ROCKS!
"If guns kill people, do pencils misspell words?"
Reply With Quote
  #326  
Old 12-17-2013, 8:01 AM
Casual_Shooter's Avatar
Casual_Shooter Casual_Shooter is offline
Ban Hammer Avoidance Team
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Did you notice how far over I've moved this part of my info? You should try it, it's fun.
Posts: 10,586
iTrader: 54 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackhawk556 View Post
which blog would that be?
Just a guess, but most likely the CGF blog found here:

http://www.calgunsfoundation.org/blog/
__________________
Guns, dogs and home alarms. Opponents are all of a sudden advocates once their personal space is violated.

"Those who cannot remember the posts are condemned to repeat them"

I wish I had a dollar for every time someone used a cliché

Why is it all the funny stuff happens to comedians?
Reply With Quote
  #327  
Old 12-17-2013, 8:16 AM
Manolito's Avatar
Manolito Manolito is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Milford California Pop. 72
Posts: 2,326
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Help an old guy out. I read the update on the Blog and the judge was pretty clear about what he said. Now does it become law or what is the procedure from this point on? Wife and I have California CCW and does that mean in the future we are a cash and carry person?
I know these are dumb question to those of you that deal in this I raise sheep and ranch not a law guy.

Thanks
Bill
Reply With Quote
  #328  
Old 12-17-2013, 8:26 AM
HowardW56's Avatar
HowardW56 HowardW56 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 5,891
iTrader: 21 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Manolito View Post
Help an old guy out. I read the update on the Blog and the judge was pretty clear about what he said. Now does it become law or what is the procedure from this point on? Wife and I have California CCW and does that mean in the future we are a cash and carry person?
I know these are dumb question to those of you that deal in this I raise sheep and ranch not a law guy.

Thanks
Bill
SILVESTER V. HARRIS (10-day wait) will proceed to trial... The state was not allowed a shortcut to ending the lawsuit.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #329  
Old 12-17-2013, 9:13 AM
not-fishing's Avatar
not-fishing not-fishing is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Folsom next to Dyke 8 launch
Posts: 1,929
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Manolito View Post
Help an old guy out. I read the update on the Blog and the judge was pretty clear about what he said. Now does it become law or what is the procedure from this point on? Wife and I have California CCW and does that mean in the future we are a cash and carry person?
I know these are dumb question to those of you that deal in this I raise sheep and ranch not a law guy.

Thanks
Bill
You're not alone and I've built Rocket Fuel Manufacturing Structures. it was rocket science

but I'm still just a construction laborer who can count
__________________
Spreading the WORD according to COLT. and Smith, Wesson, Ruger, HK, Sig, High Standard, Browning
Reply With Quote
  #330  
Old 12-17-2013, 9:57 AM
thayne's Avatar
thayne thayne is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: CA
Posts: 2,288
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Blog has been updated http://www.calgunsfoundation.org/blog/
__________________
Quote:
"It wasn't a failure of laws," said Amanda Wilcox, who along with her husband, Nick, lobbies for the California chapter of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. "I just don't see how our gun laws could have stopped something like that."
Reply With Quote
  #331  
Old 12-17-2013, 10:14 AM
wildhawker's Avatar
wildhawker wildhawker is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: California
Posts: 14,231
iTrader: 84 / 100%
Default

Blog update on the case here: http://www.calgunsfoundation.org/201...handgun-roster
__________________
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
  #332  
Old 12-17-2013, 11:08 AM
sholling's Avatar
sholling sholling is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,347
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Based on the judge's obsession with standing and with limiting the 2nd Amendment by presupposing that intermediate scrutiny was the standard of review for an enumerated right it seems pretty obvious that she had made up her mind to rule against us and the Bill of Rights before she ever got to the court room. I'm guessing that she'll spend the next 90 to 180 days trying to justify that ruling and stalling us for as long as possible. I'd be shocked if she hadn't been drafting the ruling in her head before the first argument was made in her court room.
__________________
"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.

Life Member: California Rifle & Pistol Association
Reply With Quote
  #333  
Old 12-17-2013, 11:35 AM
Calplinker Calplinker is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 1,615
iTrader: 12 / 93%
Default DOJ

Very interesting read from Gene's write up. Pretty scary (though not surprising) to hear that CalDOJ feels that limiting handguns to .22lr models only or banning them outright and telling us to use Tasers for self defense is consistent with Heller and McDonald and the constitution.

This illustrates well their intended goal of complete disarmement of the population.
Reply With Quote
  #334  
Old 12-17-2013, 11:50 AM
Tiberius's Avatar
Tiberius Tiberius is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,137
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Sounds like the judge is inclined to punt, and use standing as the way to do so.

Arg. I thought the briefs were well done, and especially with the new microstamping requirement, the roster is an outright ban. But, it aint over yet.
Reply With Quote
  #335  
Old 12-17-2013, 3:38 PM
Write Winger's Avatar
Write Winger Write Winger is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 6,133
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Recockulous...
Reply With Quote
  #336  
Old 12-17-2013, 6:53 PM
CaliforniaLiberal's Avatar
CaliforniaLiberal CaliforniaLiberal is offline
#1 Bull Goose Loony
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 4,570
iTrader: 23 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Manolito View Post
Help an old guy out. I read the update on the Blog and the judge was pretty clear about what he said. Now does it become law or what is the procedure from this point on? Wife and I have California CCW and does that mean in the future we are a cash and carry person?
I know these are dumb question to those of you that deal in this I raise sheep and ranch not a law guy.

Thanks
Bill

This case is nowhere near it's end. This was just an early step in a long process. Maybe another year or two?
__________________
Better Way to Search CalGuns - https://www.google.com/cse/home?cx=0...78:pzxbzjzh1zk
CA Bill Search - http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/fa...chClient.xhtml
C D Michel, Good Info CA Gun Law, New CA Legislation - http://www.calgunlaws.com
California Rifle and Pistol Association - http://crpa.org/membership/
Sacramento County Sheriff Concealed Carry Info - https://www.sacsheriff.com/Pages/Org.../SIIB/CCW.aspx
Second Amendment Foundation - http://www.saf.org
Reply With Quote
  #337  
Old 12-17-2013, 8:01 PM
mshill's Avatar
mshill mshill is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 3,219
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

If you read the blog entry the issue of standing seems to be something that they pay a lot of attention to. You bet the judge wants to discard it based on standing but it appears that it as made clear that standing isn't the issue.

What pisses me off is that it may take 3 to 6 months just to find out if it does to trial. No wonder these things take forever.
Reply With Quote
  #338  
Old 12-17-2013, 9:18 PM
fizux's Avatar
fizux fizux is offline
Senior Member
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 1,541
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mshill View Post
If you read the blog entry the issue of standing seems to be something that they pay a lot of attention to. You bet the judge wants to discard it based on standing but it appears that it as made clear that standing isn't the issue.

What pisses me off is that it may take 3 to 6 months just to find out if it does to trial. No wonder these things take forever.
... and another 2+ years on appeal, if handled expeditiously, regardless of who prevails at the trial court.

At least things are starting to shake loose with Chovan, then a favorable trial court ruling in Silvester, and now progress in Peña. Hopefully the streak continues, and we don't get Palmered on the carry cases that were argued just over a year ago at 9CA.
__________________
Nationwide Master List of Current 2A Cases, courtesy of Al Norris @ TFL.

Reloading Clubs: SF, East Bay

Case Status: Peña v. Cid (Handgun Roster). SF v. 44Mag (Mag Parts Kits). Bauer v. Harris (DROS Fees). Davis v. LA (CCW policy). Jackson v. SF (Ammo/Storage). Teixeira (FFL Zoning). First Unitarian v. NSA (Privacy). Silvester (Waiting Period). Schoepf (DROS Delay). Haynie (AW ban). SFVPOA v. SF (10+ mag possession ban). Bear in Public: Drake (3CA); Moore (7CA); Richards, Peruta, McKay (9CA).
Reply With Quote
  #339  
Old 12-18-2013, 10:11 PM
hoffmang's Avatar
hoffmang hoffmang is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Peninsula, Bay Area
Posts: 18,448
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

The court asked the parties to stipulate to some additional facts. That request should be here - http://www.archive.org/download/gov....91444.78.0.pdf - but RECAP is having some issues today.

The relevant text is:
Quote:
The court now orders the parties to file a stipulation as to the following evidence:

1. How many of the 1,273 handguns on the roster contained in Exhibit A of Stephen Lindley’s Declaration are semiautomatics? (See ECF 59.)

2. How many of these semiautomatics are center fire and how many rimfire?

3. How many of these semiautomatics are grandfathered and not subject to the UHA’s microstamping requirement?
The parties have 14 days to file a joint statement or any opposition/disagreement on those facts (if any.)

-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
  #340  
Old 12-18-2013, 10:20 PM
Tripper's Avatar
Tripper Tripper is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Central Coast-Salinas
Posts: 7,750
iTrader: 102 / 100%
Default

How is it the Edwards case doesn't get visited
The one about ccw, where the judge specifically stated his rights were not violated because he could open carry.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #341  
Old 12-18-2013, 10:22 PM
Tripper's Avatar
Tripper Tripper is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Central Coast-Salinas
Posts: 7,750
iTrader: 102 / 100%
Default

Those stipulations actually do not sound promising



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #342  
Old 12-18-2013, 11:38 PM
Librarian's Avatar
Librarian Librarian is offline
Administrator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Cottage Grove, OR
Posts: 39,150
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Blog Entries: 6
Default

Quote:
3. How many of these semiautomatics are grandfathered and not subject to the UHA’s microstamping requirement?
Is that an extract from the existing Roster, or something else?

Presuming Roster, and that they don't fall off the Roster, and the Legislature does not further change the law, the answer is 'all of them'.
__________________
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
  #343  
Old 12-19-2013, 12:38 AM
JoshuaS's Avatar
JoshuaS JoshuaS is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 1,617
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Librarian View Post
Is that an extract from the existing Roster, or something else?

Presuming Roster, and that they don't fall off the Roster, and the Legislature does not further change the law, the answer is 'all of them'.
Actually not true.

Armatrix iP1 / Steel; Polymer Pistol 3.58" .22 LR


The only semiauto added after the microstamping was required
Reply With Quote
  #344  
Old 12-19-2013, 2:01 AM
Tiberius's Avatar
Tiberius Tiberius is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,137
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Er, wait, what? Does this Armatrix have microstamping? I found on another thread that it has all kinds of oddball features (like an electronic mag disconnect) and costs an arm and a leg - but I saw nothing about microstamping.
Reply With Quote
  #345  
Old 12-19-2013, 2:39 AM
Librarian's Avatar
Librarian Librarian is offline
Administrator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Cottage Grove, OR
Posts: 39,150
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Blog Entries: 6
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoshuaS View Post
Actually not true.

Armatrix iP1 / Steel; Polymer Pistol 3.58" .22 LR


The only semiauto added after the microstamping was required
It seems that guns submitted for testing appear to get the rules for the date of submission; changes to the law that go into effect during testing do not apply.

I would have no way to know for sure, but I suspect that would be the case here.
__________________
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
  #346  
Old 12-19-2013, 2:32 PM
RipVanWinkle RipVanWinkle is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: S.F. Bay Area
Posts: 266
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiberius View Post
Er, wait, what? Does this Armatrix have microstamping? I found on another thread that it has all kinds of oddball features (like an electronic mag disconnect) and costs an arm and a leg - but I saw nothing about microstamping.
http://www.armatix.us/Home.783.0.html?&L=7

I didn't see anything about microstamping on their website. It all looks really expensive, made in Germany. ETA: €7,000 (or $9,700) for the iP1. Not in my price range for a .22 lr plinker! Various kinds of safety devices for different guns that rely on battery power. That could be a potential problem.

Last edited by RipVanWinkle; 12-19-2013 at 2:57 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #347  
Old 12-19-2013, 3:06 PM
mjmagee67's Avatar
mjmagee67 mjmagee67 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Free America, Idaho.
Posts: 2,775
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

I well be very happy when the government approved list of books, eerrrrrrr guns goes away.
Reply With Quote
  #348  
Old 12-19-2013, 3:48 PM
IVC's Avatar
IVC IVC is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Temecula
Posts: 14,559
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RipVanWinkle View Post
I didn't see anything about microstamping on their website. It all looks really expensive, made in Germany. ETA: €7,000 (or $9,700) for the iP1. Not in my price range for a .22 lr plinker! Various kinds of safety devices for different guns that rely on battery power. That could be a potential problem.
The gun doesn't have microstamping, but that doesn't even begin to address problems with the concept they are pushing.

We should pretty much actively boycott any product and any affiliate of this company. This is not the proper "innovation" that is offered on the "free market" where we pay for a novelty or interesting concept just to try it out or to see how it works, especially if it's very exotic. Quite the opposite - these guys are trying to exploit the most restrictive firearm markets by lobbying for legislative monopoly on their technology and *forcing* their product on people as the only solution.

We better make sure they never do any market research on our backs, then convince legislators that all guns have to have electronics they provide. This is a concept of "roster microstamping" on steroids.
__________________
NRA Benefactor Member
Reply With Quote
  #349  
Old 12-19-2013, 10:31 PM
CCWFacts CCWFacts is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 5,831
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hoffmang View Post
The court asked the parties to stipulate to some additional facts. ...
The parties have 14 days to file a joint statement or any opposition/disagreement on those facts (if any.)
My interpretation of that is, the court is thinking:
  1. A center-fire semi-auto pistol is the standard choice for self-defense in America
  2. If there are a wide range of center-fire semi-autos here, then maybe the right isn't being burdened

It's reasonable for the court to want to know that. They may not have a sense for how much of a burden it is. If there are, say, 10,000 different semi-auto centerfire pistols to choose from, then maybe this law isn't a burden. On the other hand, if there are only 5 to choose from, then it is a burden. (The real number is somewhere in the hundreds I guess, which, to me, is a burden.)
__________________
"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
  #350  
Old 12-19-2013, 10:32 PM
hoffmang's Avatar
hoffmang hoffmang is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Peninsula, Bay Area
Posts: 18,448
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

The Armatix does not have microstamping.

-Gene

Last edited by hoffmang; 12-20-2013 at 9:00 PM.. Reason: Corrected autocorrected spelling.
Reply With Quote
  #351  
Old 12-19-2013, 11:01 PM
JoshuaS's Avatar
JoshuaS JoshuaS is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 1,617
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hoffmang View Post
The Armatux does not have microstamping.

-Gene
I stand corrected. I (falsely) assumed it did.



I agree with others about the BS with this gun. They talk about integrating it with computers and tracking explicitly. No thanks.

What does it say that a gun developed by a bunch of opportunistic statists, whose goal is to explicitly develop arms that will allow for tight state control, still didn't incorporate mircostamping?
Reply With Quote
  #352  
Old 12-19-2013, 11:19 PM
IVC's Avatar
IVC IVC is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Temecula
Posts: 14,559
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CCWFacts View Post
  1. ...
  2. If there are a wide range of center-fire semi-autos here, then maybe the right isn't being burdened
Rosa Parks wasn't burdened at all by having had to sit in the back of the bus. It was the same type of seat, same comfort of the ride, arrived at the same time as the front of the bus and everything else was pretty much the same.

When talking about civil rights it's the government that needs to prove a restriction is achieving something, not merely say it's not doing any harm. This is the core of why a civil right is such an important concept.
__________________
NRA Benefactor Member
Reply With Quote
  #353  
Old 12-20-2013, 1:27 AM
fizux's Avatar
fizux fizux is offline
Senior Member
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 1,541
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Who picks up .22lr brass anyway? I don't like microstamping because it is really hard to tell which brass is yours when you are trying to beat the other brass vultures at the range. Now, I might consider paying extra for full-color macrostamping.
__________________
Nationwide Master List of Current 2A Cases, courtesy of Al Norris @ TFL.

Reloading Clubs: SF, East Bay

Case Status: Peña v. Cid (Handgun Roster). SF v. 44Mag (Mag Parts Kits). Bauer v. Harris (DROS Fees). Davis v. LA (CCW policy). Jackson v. SF (Ammo/Storage). Teixeira (FFL Zoning). First Unitarian v. NSA (Privacy). Silvester (Waiting Period). Schoepf (DROS Delay). Haynie (AW ban). SFVPOA v. SF (10+ mag possession ban). Bear in Public: Drake (3CA); Moore (7CA); Richards, Peruta, McKay (9CA).
Reply With Quote
  #354  
Old 12-20-2013, 11:05 AM
CCWFacts CCWFacts is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 5,831
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IVC View Post
Rosa Parks wasn't burdened at all by having had to sit in the back of the bus. It was the same type of seat, same comfort of the ride, arrived at the same time as the front of the bus and everything else was pretty much the same.

When talking about civil rights it's the government that needs to prove a restriction is achieving something, not merely say it's not doing any harm. This is the core of why a civil right is such an important concept.
I agree with you, but many judges are in the mindset of looking at this as a public policy question, like regulating tobacco or something. As Gura said (paraphrasing) in some brief, yes, it is a public policy issue, and the public set the policy in the constitution 200 years ago, and so judges don't need to look at crime statistics to figure this stuff out... But judges still aren't treating it like a civil right, and now that Obama can appoint judges without a supermajority, we're going to have a lot of judges who don't see any civil rights aspect to it.
__________________
"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
  #355  
Old 12-20-2013, 3:56 PM
hornswaggled's Avatar
hornswaggled hornswaggled is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,652
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IVC View Post
Rosa Parks wasn't burdened at all by having had to sit in the back of the bus. It was the same type of seat, same comfort of the ride, arrived at the same time as the front of the bus and everything else was pretty much the same.

When talking about civil rights it's the government that needs to prove a restriction is achieving something, not merely say it's not doing any harm. This is the core of why a civil right is such an important concept.
Exactly. Or, since you can speak freely on one square foot of land in the middle of the Mojave Desert, the government can ban public speaking in all other public places.
__________________
NRA Endowment Member
SAF Defender's Club
Reply With Quote
  #356  
Old 01-21-2014, 3:32 PM
Anchors's Avatar
Anchors Anchors is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Dystopia
Posts: 5,943
iTrader: 44 / 100%
Default

Looks like the two largest public firearm manufacturers in the world are letting all of their guns fall off the roster due to DOJ's ridiculous demands...

[public as in publicly traded]
Reply With Quote
  #357  
Old 01-21-2014, 7:38 PM
mossy's Avatar
mossy mossy is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: equestria
Posts: 6,362
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

has there been any movement on this case?
__________________
best troll thread in calguns history
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...d.php?t=406739



Quote:
Originally Posted by waterfern View Post
Not at all. Trump is a loser and will lose amazingly on Tuesday. It's going to be so big, we are all going to be sick and tired of how much he loses on Tuesday.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doheny View Post
Nah, no sense in replying to the personal attacks/baiting.
Reply With Quote
  #358  
Old 01-21-2014, 7:45 PM
Calplinker Calplinker is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 1,615
iTrader: 12 / 93%
Default Patience

Quote:
Originally Posted by mossy View Post
has there been any movement on this case?
No......
Reply With Quote
  #359  
Old 01-21-2014, 8:20 PM
Ford8N Ford8N is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Northern Rhovanion
Posts: 6,138
iTrader: 18 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mossy View Post
has there been any movement on this case?
And how much longer?
Reply With Quote
  #360  
Old 01-21-2014, 10:00 PM
mossy's Avatar
mossy mossy is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: equestria
Posts: 6,362
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Calplinker View Post
No......
lovely.
__________________
best troll thread in calguns history
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...d.php?t=406739



Quote:
Originally Posted by waterfern View Post
Not at all. Trump is a loser and will lose amazingly on Tuesday. It's going to be so big, we are all going to be sick and tired of how much he loses on Tuesday.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doheny View Post
Nah, no sense in replying to the personal attacks/baiting.
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 2:18 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, 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 2002-2018, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
Calguns.net and The Calguns Foundation have no affiliation and are in no way related to each other.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.