Additional reactions culled from the case thread in Litigation

[liberty_head]

Careful that you do not get into a straw purchase situation. The parent can purchase a gun as a gift for you, but if you are the actual buyer (the funds come from you either before or after the purchase) you are each chargeable with a federal felony.

This person's parent has owned the firearm for many years. Transfer to CA resident would have to go through CA FFL, not sure if gift or sale, but that means DROS. So, no straw purchase. They're just wondering if they can and should snag the mags now, in case they end up with that pistol and the opportunity to acquire the standard capacity mags goes away.

[readysetgo]

Thanks to LVSox and other attorneys who are educating us and and keeping our expectations realistic.

[1bulletBarney]

Thanks for the kinds words.

We will address this "nuisance" issue shortly.

If anyone has their LCM seized by law enforcement and the officer claims it is a "nuisance" please do not hesitate to contact our office. While it is always smart to exercise caution, we are of the opinion that the "nuisance" provision is unenforceable. Standby for more in depth analysis.

You guys ROCK !!!

[Marktallica]

Folks, let's keep this thread for actual events in the case, such as Sean's posting of the opposition to the stay.

Lots of other threads for other commentary; this one will get pruned sometime soon.

In case people missed it.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[bgarbled]

Thanks for the kinds words.



We will address this "nuisance" issue shortly.



If anyone has their LCM seized by law enforcement and the officer claims it is a "nuisance" please do not hesitate to contact our office. While it is always smart to exercise caution, we are of the opinion that the "nuisance" provision is unenforceable. Standby for more in depth analysis.

Thank you!

[NapaPlinker]

Exceptional.

Keep up the good work!

Thanks for the kinds words.

We will address this "nuisance" issue shortly.

If anyone has their LCM seized by law enforcement and the officer claims it is a "nuisance" please do not hesitate to contact our office. While it is always smart to exercise caution, we are of the opinion that the "nuisance" provision is unenforceable. Standby for more in depth analysis.

[Syntax Error]

I'm guessing State agencies and Federal courthouses close at 5:00pm Pacific time? If we don't hear anything within 20 minutes, safe to say we survived another day without an emergency stay order?

[Smedkcuf]

Thanks for the kinds words.

We will address this "nuisance" issue shortly.

If anyone has their LCM seized by law enforcement and the officer claims it is a "nuisance" please do not hesitate to contact our office. While it is always smart to exercise caution, we are of the opinion that the "nuisance" provision is unenforceable. Standby for more in depth analysis.

[Chewy65]

This person's parent has owned the firearm for many years. Transfer to CA resident would have to go through CA FFL, not sure if gift or sale, but that means DROS. So, no straw purchase. They're just wondering if they can and should snag the mags now, in case they end up with that pistol and the opportunity to acquire the standard capacity mags goes away.

In most posts I have read the gun being transferred by use of a CA FFL by means of the intra-familial rule are always structured as a gift. However, in the past I have wondered if it must be a gift and not a purchase from the out of state family member. I seem to recall that at least one FFL agreed with me on CalGuns, but I have no conclusive authority and as I am no longer an active member of the California Bar Association I cannot give legal advice. Even if I could, I wouldn't as I have not properly researched the question as I would when a practicing attorney acting for a client. You, of course, are not my client.

[Chewy65]

See the statement of mine given in Post 2228 re being an inactive member of the bar and not being allowed to practice as an attorney, which means I cannot give an opinion, and no one being my client This is not a legal opinion that anyone may rely upon. 32311 is still enforceable, though much of the same findings delivered in the Dunn Judgment, can be argued to establish the unconstitutionality of 32311. That does not mean that making those arguments will prove successful and/or should they prevail you won't be out a lot of money and grief.

[USMCmatt]

UPDATE: FAQ FROM CRPA

April 2, 2019 – NRA and CRPA Attorneys Oppose California’s Request to Immediately Halt “Large-Capacity” Magazine Ruling

Details Below:

https://crpa.org/news/blogs/crpanews-special-alert-nra-and-crpa-attorneys-oppose-californias-request-to-immediately-halt-large-capacity-magazine-ruling/

[MajorCaliber]

Thanks for the kinds words.

We will address this "nuisance" issue shortly.

If anyone has their LCM seized by law enforcement and the officer claims it is a "nuisance" please do not hesitate to contact our office. While it is always smart to exercise caution, we are of the opinion that the "nuisance" provision is unenforceable. Standby for more in depth analysis.

Out-BLEEPIN'-Standing!!!

This has been another longstanding abuse of our rights, and it certainly looks like the time is finally ripe to argue both 4A grounds and "See Duncan".

Almost makes we want to carry around a lawfully owned 10+ mag and show it to every LEO I see just so I could have the honor of being the test case. Got nothing to lose but 1 mag. I even have a legally owned pre-2000 mag for a gun that I don't even own. "Caliber V Becerra" has a nice ring to it don't you think?

It would SO not surprise me to hear that the powers that be quietly put out the word that they don't want any such seizures at the moment just to avoid creating standing for a challenge case.

[Chewy65]

See the CYA statement of mine given in Post 2228 re not being an attorney and know one being my client; this is not a legal opinion that anyone may rely upon. 32311 is still enforceable.

[Chewy65]

Defendant’s Response to Plaintiffs’ Opposition to Ex Parte Application for Temporary Stay of the Judgment

"Plaintiffs offer no evidence that there are any Californians who have either ordered or are currently in possession of LCMs in reliance on the Court’s ruling. "

LMAO

Cute. What is Sean to do? Get affidavits from individuals that possibly could later be used to prosecute them, depending on how things finally shake out with an appeal to the 9th and possible a trip to SCOTUS?

[SnFour]