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
  #3841  
Old 07-19-2021, 6:42 AM
ir0nclash86's Avatar
ir0nclash86 ir0nclash86 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Garden Grove
Posts: 3,986
iTrader: 149 / 100%
Default

__________________
Rock out with your Glock out
Reply With Quote
  #3842  
Old 07-19-2021, 10:10 AM
CandG's Avatar
CandG CandG is offline
Vendor/Retailer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 16,551
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ir0nclash86 View Post
(clip)
Can we get a recap for those of use who don't want to watch another 9 minute "make sure to like and subscribe" armed scholar video?
__________________
AW Reg. will likely be reopened summer '21 to those who weren't able to register by 7/18. We don't know what that means for firearms made compliant when reg. failed or if they can or must be converted to AW configuration before registering. There's a moratorium on prosecutions for possession of AWs which were eligible for registration, but AWs acquired after 2016 can still be prosecuted!
Extremely important note: DON'T register anything acquired after 2016!!!
Reply With Quote
  #3843  
Old 07-19-2021, 10:51 AM
ShadowGuy's Avatar
ShadowGuy ShadowGuy is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 388
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Here you go.

https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/...postcount=3835

Quote:
Originally Posted by CandG View Post
Can we get a recap for those of use who don't want to watch another 9 minute "make sure to like and subscribe" armed scholar video?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShadowGuy View Post
I just saw it reported on Armed Scholar that the plaintiffs filed a 28j letter with the court citing this SCOTUS decision. Looks like I was not the only one that saw the similarities.

They also pointed to the recent decision in Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Bonta, in regards to lack of narrowing tailoring the laws to the issue at hand is unconstitutional. This could be very good, not only for Duncan, but also Miller and Rupp. In all 4 cases including AFP (which was called out by Roberts as unconstitutional), it shows the incompetence of the CA lawmakers in crafting constitutional laws, and the incompetence of CA9 in correcting the constitutional infringement.

It probably wont make a difference to the 9th, but when this gets to SCOTUS, these are excellent points.

I have not been able to locate the letters posted online yet, so my only source is the Armed Scholars youtube channel.

https://youtu.be/G3ECVw2DOsY
https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/...postcount=3840
Quote:
Originally Posted by abinsinia View Post
here is the 28 j letter.
__________________
Quote:
...Well, Mr. Dangerfield can feel better about himself now, because with Proposition 63, the Second Amendment gets even less respect than he does....
- Hon. Roger T. Benitez

Last edited by ShadowGuy; 07-19-2021 at 10:54 AM.. Reason: adding links
Reply With Quote
  #3844  
Old 07-20-2021, 10:57 AM
darkwater34 darkwater34 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 113
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

probably not until 09/14 after we fire Nusome then we can start impeaching judges who fail to reconize our BILL OF RIGHTS and the CONSTUTION and fail their OATH to protect it. Will we the people get a fair unbiased decision.
Reply With Quote
  #3845  
Old 07-21-2021, 8:18 AM
GregW948 GregW948 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 327
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by darkwater34 View Post
probably not until 09/14 after we fire Nusome then we can start impeaching judges who fail to reconize our BILL OF RIGHTS and the CONSTUTION and fail their OATH to protect it. Will we the people get a fair unbiased decision.
If you think that the Democratic Commie machine here in CA will allow that, I hate to disappoint you
Reply With Quote
  #3846  
Old 07-21-2021, 12:21 PM
darkwater34 darkwater34 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 113
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

It is not them that worries me it is the DARK STATE dressed to look like democrats that scares the crap out of me
Reply With Quote
  #3847  
Old 07-21-2021, 12:28 PM
darkwater34 darkwater34 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 113
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Demcrats should be afraid very afraid when this snake called the DARK STATE starts to comsume itself as they will be the first to be eaten as they are the tail of the snake.
Reply With Quote
  #3848  
Old 07-21-2021, 12:29 PM
aBrowningfan aBrowningfan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 1,452
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by darkwater34 View Post
It is not them that worries me it is the DARK STATE dressed to look like democrats that scares the crap out of me
Sounds like a distinction without a difference.
Reply With Quote
  #3849  
Old 07-21-2021, 12:30 PM
aBrowningfan aBrowningfan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 1,452
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by darkwater34 View Post
Demcrats should be afraid very afraid when this snake called the DARK STATE starts to comsume itself as they will be the first to be eaten as they are the tail of the snake.
Rs voted for Prop 63....
Reply With Quote
  #3850  
Old 07-21-2021, 12:45 PM
Dvrjon Dvrjon is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 8,955
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by darkwater34 View Post
probably not until 09/14 after we fire Nusome then we can start impeaching judges who fail to reconize our BILL OF RIGHTS and the CONSTUTION and fail their OATH to protect it. Will we the people get a fair unbiased decision.
No, “we” can’t.

Perhaps one should look into the provisions of impeaching judges.

California judges may be removed in one of three ways:
Judges may be impeached by the assembly and convicted by two thirds of the senate.

Judges are subject to recall election.

The commission on judicial performance investigates complaints of judicial misconduct and incapacity and may privately admonish, suspend, censure, retire, or remove a judge. The commission's decisions are subject to review by the (CA) supreme court.

////////

Federal Judges

Article III of the Constitution governs the appointment, tenure, and payment of Supreme Court justices, and federal circuit and district judges. These judges, often referred to as “Article III judges,” are nominated by the President and confirmed by the U.S. Senate. Article III states that these judges “hold their office during good behavior,” which means they have a lifetime appointment, except under very limited circumstances. Article III judges can be removed from office only through impeachment by the House of Representatives and conviction by the Senate.
__________________
"People say nothing is impossible, but I do nothing every day.”
"Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently-talented fool."
"The things that come to those who wait may well be the things left by those who got there first."

Last edited by Dvrjon; 07-21-2021 at 5:12 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #3851  
Old 07-21-2021, 4:30 PM
ar15barrels's Avatar
ar15barrels ar15barrels is online now
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Van Nuys
Posts: 51,207
iTrader: 111 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aBrowningfan View Post
Rs voted for Prop 63....
Who is Rs?

Google says it's Serbia's top level domain.
Reply With Quote
  #3852  
Old 07-21-2021, 6:10 PM
BeAuMaN's Avatar
BeAuMaN BeAuMaN is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 1,085
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ar15barrels View Post
Who is Rs?

Google says it's Serbia's top level domain.
Republicans. I haven't seen a vote breakdown on Prop 63 by party.
Reply With Quote
  #3853  
Old 07-21-2021, 7:32 PM
Dvrjon Dvrjon is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 8,955
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BeAuMaN View Post
Republicans. I haven't seen a vote breakdown on Prop 63 by party.
Some interesting numbers from Nov 2018:

Governor Race
Newsom: 61.9% (7.7M votes)
Cox: 38.1% (4.7M votes)

Proposition 63:
Yes: 63.08% (8.7M votes)
No: 36.92% (5.1M votes)

Clearly, all 13 million gun owners didn’t vote, or if they did, they voted for the other side.

The telling point here is, while 7.7M votes supported Newsom, 8.7M votes supported Proposition 63 which was Newsom’s flagship! It’s not unreasonable to assume that those who voted for Newsom also supported his initiative…so, where’d the other million votes come from?
__________________
"People say nothing is impossible, but I do nothing every day.”
"Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently-talented fool."
"The things that come to those who wait may well be the things left by those who got there first."
Reply With Quote
  #3854  
Old 07-21-2021, 9:26 PM
Batman's Avatar
Batman Batman is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Mission Viejo (OC)
Posts: 2,117
iTrader: 163 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dvrjon View Post
Some interesting numbers from Nov 2018:

Governor Race
Newsom: 61.9% (7.7M votes)
Cox: 38.1% (4.7M votes)

Proposition 63:
Yes: 63.08% (8.7M votes)
No: 36.92% (5.1M votes)

Clearly, all 13 million gun owners didn’t vote, or if they did, they voted for the other side.

The telling point here is, while 7.7M votes supported Newsom, 8.7M votes supported Proposition 63 which was Newsom’s flagship! It’s not unreasonable to assume that those who voted for Newsom also supported his initiative…so, where’d the other million votes come from?
You're using a false analogy to try to prove your point. There were 1.5 million more votes for Prop 63 than for Newsome. To say that that more votes were from Republicans because ALL the Democrats voted for Gavin isn't equivalency. I would say the Prop 63 people had a better ad campaign, they had better press representation, and had a much better funded campaign in all. Gavin won the Governor's race easily, but he was much more liked up in the Bay area. I can probably point to just Los Angeles and say that 1.5 million votes for Prop 63 came from here, and those Democratic Party voters didn't really give a rats about Gavin, and I'd probably be closer to the truth.
Reply With Quote
  #3855  
Old 07-21-2021, 9:36 PM
MountainLion's Avatar
MountainLion MountainLion is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Tarzana
Posts: 160
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Apples and oranges. The governor election you're quoting was in November 2018, a gubernatorial election. There was not very much interesting stuff on the ballot, congress and state wide races, and the outcome of nearly all of those was pre-ordained (except the non-partisan education secretary). On the other hand, Prop 63 wa on the November 2016 election, which was a presidential election, between Trump and Clinton. Turnout was much higher in 2016.
__________________
meow
Reply With Quote
  #3856  
Old 07-21-2021, 10:40 PM
aBrowningfan aBrowningfan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 1,452
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ar15barrels View Post
Who is Rs?

Google says it's Serbia's top level domain.
Too cute by half?
Reply With Quote
  #3857  
Old 07-21-2021, 10:53 PM
aBrowningfan aBrowningfan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 1,452
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MountainLion View Post
Apples and oranges. The governor election you're quoting was in November 2018, a gubernatorial election. There was not very much interesting stuff on the ballot, congress and state wide races, and the outcome of nearly all of those was pre-ordained (except the non-partisan education secretary). On the other hand, Prop 63 wa on the November 2016 election, which was a presidential election, between Trump and Clinton. Turnout was much higher in 2016.
From Wikipedia ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_U..._in_California ):

Clinton (D) - 61.73%
Trump (R) - 31.62%

Prop 63 ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_C...Proposition_63 ):
Yes - 63.08%
No - 36.92%

Yes on Prop 63 polled better than Hillary. Nuff said.
Reply With Quote
  #3858  
Old 07-22-2021, 8:17 AM
MountainLion's Avatar
MountainLion MountainLion is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Tarzana
Posts: 160
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aBrowningfan View Post
Yes on Prop 63 polled better than Hillary. Nuff said.
And No on Prop 63 polled better than Donald. Way better.
__________________
meow
Reply With Quote
  #3859  
Old 07-23-2021, 11:12 AM
ninjaneer ninjaneer is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2021
Posts: 5
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

For those who want to watch the oral arguments from 6/22: https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/media/v...0622/19-55376/
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 8:09 PM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, 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 2002-2021, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.



Seams2SewBySusy

Tactical Pants Tactical Boots Military Boots 5.11 Tactical