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 > Temp Post-Duncan Mag Forum
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 04-07-2019, 12:40 PM
nu2gunstuff nu2gunstuff is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 215
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by seabee1 View Post
This document is so full of true patriotic wisdom, we really got lucky with Judge Benitez. I hear rumor he may be the judge on the upcoming ammo restriction case as well.
Fantastic! Lots of SCMs need to be filled here in Cali!
Oh, and drums too
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 04-07-2019, 12:44 PM
nu2gunstuff nu2gunstuff is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 215
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Zombie apocalypse? Yes, Cali Savior invoked it LOL (referencing rejected judicial opinions continuing to pervade legal arguments).

Quote:
This case is about a muscular constitutional right and whether a state can impinge and imprison its citizens for exercising that right. This case is about whether a state objective is possibly important enough to justify the impingement. The problem with according deference to the state legislature in this kind of a case, as in the Turner Broadcasting approach, is that it is exactly the approach promoted by dissenting Justice Breyer and rejected by the Supreme Court’s majority in Heller. Yet, Turner deference arguments live on like legal zombies lurching through Second Amendment jurisprudence.

Last edited by nu2gunstuff; 04-07-2019 at 12:48 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 04-07-2019, 1:08 PM
nu2gunstuff nu2gunstuff is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 215
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

This was posted early on in Liberty Week, but is definitely worthy of a re-post:
Quote:
Perhaps the irony of § 32310 escapes notice. The reason for the adoption of the Second Amendment was to protect the citizens of the new nation from the power of an oppressive state. The anti-federalists were worried about the risk of oppression by a standing army. The colonies had witnessed the standing army of England marching through Lexington to Concord, Massachusetts, on a mission to seize the arms and gunpowder of the militia and the Minutemen—an attack that ignited the Revolutionary war. With Colonists still hurting from the wounds of war, the Second Amendment guaranteed the rights of new American citizens to protect themselves from oppressors foreign and domestic. So, now it is ironic that the State whittles away at the right of its citizens to defend themselves from the possible oppression of their State.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 04-07-2019, 1:15 PM
seabee1's Avatar
seabee1 seabee1 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,047
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gobler View Post
He needs to be on the 9th at the very least...
Imagine him in the SCOTUS
__________________
Unless a law-abiding individual has a firearm for his or her own defense, the police typically arrive after it is too late. With rigor mortis setting in, they mark and bag the evidence, interview bystanders, and draw a chalk outline on the ground. But the victim, nevertheless, is dead, or raped, or robbed, or traumatized.

the Honorable Roger T. Benitez
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 04-07-2019, 1:21 PM
M60A1Rise's Avatar
M60A1Rise M60A1Rise is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 348
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Obviously:
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:CLERK OF COURT JOHN MORRILL, Clerk of Court, DeputyA. Finnell-YepezBy: s/ A. Finnell-YepezDate:3/29/19Plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment is granted. California Penal Code § 32310 is hereby declared to be unconstitutional in its entirety and shall be enjoined.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 04-07-2019, 1:28 PM
nu2gunstuff nu2gunstuff is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 215
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
The State provides the deposition testimony of Carlisle Moody, a professor, who opines that, “[f]irearms fitted with large capacity magazines can be used to cause death and injury in public shooting incidents, and can also result in more rounds fired and more homicides in general than similar firearms with smaller magazines,” but concedes this conclusion is simply theoretical. DX-7 at 472-73 (Q. And what is the basis for that statement? How did you arrive at that conclusion? A. Just theoretically.”). Furthermore, the same can be said of a 10-round magazine versus a 7-round magazine, or a 7-round magazine versus a 2-round Derringer.
Translation: dweeby pencil-necked professors need not apply. I'll school your a** right quick.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 04-07-2019, 1:35 PM
nu2gunstuff nu2gunstuff is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 215
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

St. Benitez and 5D chess, turning state's argument back on them:

Quote:
State expert John J. Donahue goes farther and opines that private individuals only need to “brandish” a gun to scare off criminals. So, the notion that a stray round may penetrate a wall does not translate into
any greater risk of bystander injury when a large capacity magazine is used by a defender since it will likely be used only for brandishing or for the average 2.3 shots. Even safer may be a large capacity magazine on an AR-15 type of rifle as it is likely to be more persuasive when brandished at criminal assailants than would a five-shot revolver.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 04-07-2019, 1:42 PM
nu2gunstuff nu2gunstuff is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 215
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

"lethal pause" vs. the State's proposed "critical pause":
Quote:
The State argues that smaller magazines create a “critical pause” in the shooting of a mass killer. “The prohibition of LCMs helps create a “critical pause” that has been proven to give victims an opportunity to hide, escape, or disable a shooter.” Def. Oppo., at 19. This may be the case for attackers. On the other hand, from the perspective of a victim trying to defend her home and family, the time required to re-load a pistol after the tenth shot might be called a “lethal pause,” as it typically takes a victim much longer to re-load (if they can do it at all) than a perpetrator planning an attack. In other words, the re-loading “pause” the State seeks in hopes of stopping a mass shooter, also tends to create an even more dangerous time for every victim who must try to defend herself with a small-capacity magazine. The need to re-load and the lengthy pause that comes with banning all but small-capacity magazines is especially unforgiving for victims who are disabled, or who have arthritis, or who are trying to hold a phone in their off-hand while attempting to call for police help. The good that a re-loading pause might do in the extremely rare mass shooting incident is vastly outweighed by the harm visited on manifold law-abiding, citizen-victims who must also pause while under attack. This blanket ban without any tailoring to these types of needs goes to show § 32310’s lack of reasonable fit.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 04-07-2019, 2:42 PM
nu2gunstuff nu2gunstuff is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 215
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Cali Savior St. Benitez writes...

Quote:
Accordingly, based upon the law and the evidence, upon which there is no genuine issue, and for the reasons stated in this opinion, Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment is granted. California Penal Code § 32310 is hereby declared to be unconstitutional in its entirety and shall be enjoined.

This decision is a freedom calculus decided long ago by Colonists who cherished individual freedom more than the subservient security of a British ruler. The freedom they fought for was not free of cost then, and it is not free now.
...then drops the mic.

I'm done. What a great read that was.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 04-07-2019, 5:34 PM
seabee1's Avatar
seabee1 seabee1 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,047
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
"The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
Jefferson

Quote:
But California’s ban is far-reaching, absolute, and permanent. The ban on acquisition and possession on magazines able to hold more than 10 rounds, together with the substantial criminal penalties threatening a law-abiding, responsible, citizen who desires such magazines to protect hearth and home, imposes a burden on the constitutional right that this Court judges as severe.
Benitez
__________________
Unless a law-abiding individual has a firearm for his or her own defense, the police typically arrive after it is too late. With rigor mortis setting in, they mark and bag the evidence, interview bystanders, and draw a chalk outline on the ground. But the victim, nevertheless, is dead, or raped, or robbed, or traumatized.

the Honorable Roger T. Benitez
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 04-07-2019, 5:41 PM
Wordupmybrotha's Avatar
Wordupmybrotha Wordupmybrotha is offline
From anotha motha
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Pasadena, CA
Posts: 4,270
iTrader: 57 / 100%
Default

Please take on the bullet button/featureless case.

That would be another epic opinion.
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 04-07-2019, 5:57 PM
seabee1's Avatar
seabee1 seabee1 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,047
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wordupmybrotha View Post
Please take on the bullet button/featureless case.

That would be another epic opinion.
No doubt!
__________________
Unless a law-abiding individual has a firearm for his or her own defense, the police typically arrive after it is too late. With rigor mortis setting in, they mark and bag the evidence, interview bystanders, and draw a chalk outline on the ground. But the victim, nevertheless, is dead, or raped, or robbed, or traumatized.

the Honorable Roger T. Benitez
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 04-07-2019, 7:06 PM
Redeyedrider's Avatar
Redeyedrider Redeyedrider is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Placer Co.
Posts: 1,284
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

There's so much awesomeness it's hard to pick just one.

That being said, I'm partial to this one. Because it smacks the s*** out of any tyrannical government official that thinks they can ban the AR-15. It re-states what Heller already confirmed.

Quote:
Over the last three decades, one of the most popular civilian rifles in America is the much maligned AR-15 style rifle. Manufactured with various characteristics by numerous companies, it is estimated that more than five million have been bought since the 1980s. These rifles are typically sold with 30-round magazines. These commonly owned guns with commonly-sized magazines are protected by the Second Amendment and Heller’s simple test for responsible, law-abiding citizens to use for target practice, hunting, and defense.
__________________
=TRUMP 2020=

Quote:
I try to frame my response to be useful to those observing, with little regard to convince the opponent of my awesomeness. - EM2
Quote:
But that wasn't enough for the liberal douches. They just had to go after the grandfathered mags... And look what it got them. - L84CABO
Quote:
The media silence says more than their filthy lies - MrFancyPants
Quote:
The prosecutor only needed 5/7 jurors on board and couldn't even do that. - stix213

Last edited by Redeyedrider; 04-07-2019 at 7:26 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 04-07-2019, 7:15 PM
Redeyedrider's Avatar
Redeyedrider Redeyedrider is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Placer Co.
Posts: 1,284
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by yacko View Post
My favorite part is where he says "FU Becerra".....

If you didn't see it the first time... read it again... It's in there for sure!!!!!! Just in a lot more verbiage....
You win the internets for today
__________________
=TRUMP 2020=

Quote:
I try to frame my response to be useful to those observing, with little regard to convince the opponent of my awesomeness. - EM2
Quote:
But that wasn't enough for the liberal douches. They just had to go after the grandfathered mags... And look what it got them. - L84CABO
Quote:
The media silence says more than their filthy lies - MrFancyPants
Quote:
The prosecutor only needed 5/7 jurors on board and couldn't even do that. - stix213
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 04-07-2019, 8:35 PM
Axnjxn Axnjxn is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Santa Cruz
Posts: 7
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Page 29, lines 12-14:

Quote:
The Attorney General names five additional states that enacted firing-capacity restrictions in the 1930s with capacity limits less than 10 rounds. But he is not entirely accurate. His first example is not an example, at all...This was South Dakota’s definition of a machine gun
Translation: You are a lying sack of s*** Becerra
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 04-07-2019, 8:59 PM
pwscottiv pwscottiv is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 15
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Exclamation Leave a Positive Rating and Professional Comment for Judge Roger T. Benitez

The Honorable Judge Roger T. Benitez defended our Constitution and the rights of the citizens of California.
If you appreciate the service he's doing for the citizens of our country, please leave a positive rating and professional comment here:

http://www.therobingroom.com/Judge.aspx?ID=176

NOTE: The first 8 options should be given a score of 10. The last 6 options should be in the middle of the road.

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 4:49 PM.




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.