Peņa v. Cid (Handgun Roster) **CERT DENIED 6-15-2020**

[SantaCabinetguy]

The real problem is that LCI and MDS severely limit availability in the first place.

Remove *just* microstamping from the roster requirements and we still cannot have A SINGLE (non-grandfathered) Glock, HK, S&W semi-auto, Springfield, FNH, Beretta, etc. Not a single one!

It's similar to how the magazine capacity affects availability - it's not just that we have to have no more than 10, but there are MANY guns that don't come in restricted versions and aftermarket magazines are all but impossible to find. Akin to forcing "cars with 10 gallon or smaller tanks" - sure it would reduce bank robberies by forcing fleeing robbers to fill up more often (sarcasm), but it would also significantly limit car availability since very few have such tanks.

If we just lose the microstamping, we lost in practical terms.

[Untamed1972]

https://youtu.be/m-B_ZY9AwDs?t=25m11s



Do they actually seriously believe this? Is that their official justification for passing these laws?

I have formal quotes from news interviews with some politicans who "wrote" (rather, had ghost-written) the legislation. They explicitly said it was to 'get rid of guns from our state'. If there is one thing I can not tolerate, it is blatant hypocrisy. It is fine if they have a belief in something and follow their convictions. It is another when they are in a willful state of cognitive dissonance.

I hate to make the analogy as it appears to cheapen the message, but Orwell discussed exactly this idea when he described "doublethink". I sincerely hope (and expect) these judges are at least aware of the obviousness of this from the ADA's responses. They are well read, well educated individuals. If they turn a blind eye to this it would throw any semblance of their impartiality out the window.

As a quote I heard once said, "I can live with being a pawn if the game makes sense!"

I was thinking this when I heard some things about the 2nd version of the Trump travel ban where the judge basically said: "Yes you addressed the previous issues, but because of what you said before about wanting a Muslim ban, I'm ruling against it anyway because that is your true intent...to ban Muslims."

Well if that's how judges are going to rule now, it shouldn't be too hard to find plenty of quotes from politicians stating what their real desire is....which is to ban guns entirely....and say in court "Here is the record of their true intentions your honor."

I loved the part in the video where it is state that even the states own safety manual says not to rely on the LCI. Not to mention the laundry list of people who are exempt from it.....if these things truly make guns safer why wouldn't everyone be required to use only guns on the roster? Answer....because doing so would remove viable options of LE and they don't like that.....so clearly the intent of the roster is to remove options from the general public, nothing more, nothing less. And that was the real intent of microstamping....eliminate options by mandating something that doesn't exist.

I think it should be illegal for the Gov't to be able to mandate the use of non-existent technology. Heck....why don't they just mandate the use of Star Trek phasers if they can mandate stuff that doesn't exist?

At least the one judge noted that microstamping does not improve firearm safety, its merely an investigative tool for the police in the event of a crime.

[IVC]

But as a practical matter, the after market will largely step in to take care of our desire to remove LCI and MDM, no such possibilities with microstamping which is not commercially available.

The real problem is that LCI and MDS severely limit availability in the first place.

Remove *just* microstamping from the roster requirements and we still cannot have A SINGLE (non-grandfathered) Glock, HK, S&W semi-auto, Springfield, FNH, Beretta, etc. Not a single one!

It's similar to how the magazine capacity affects availability - it's not just that we have to have no more than 10, but there are MANY guns that don't come in restricted versions and aftermarket magazines are all but impossible to find. Akin to forcing "cars with 10 gallon or smaller tanks" - sure it would reduce bank robberies by forcing fleeing robbers to fill up more often (sarcasm), but it would also significantly limit car availability since very few have such tanks.

If we just lose the microstamping, we lost in practical terms.

[thorium]

All the LCIs need to go - as has been often advised, an LCI must be replaced by training: 'don't point guns at people'. (or at most other stuff)

Agreed.

But as a practical matter, the after market will largely step in to take care of our desire to remove LCI and MDM, no such possibilities with microstamping which is not commercially available.

Example of after market LCI 'upgrade' for SW Shield -- https://www.apextactical.com/blog/in...ld-sd-pistols/

[Citizen One]

https://youtu.be/m-B_ZY9AwDs?t=25m11s

ADA: Unlike Heller, it's not a categorical ban on an entire class..

Judge (right): Isn't it a categorical ban on any guns NOT containing the kinds of security devices that you now want, the MDM the CLI? The microstamping?

ADA: [Audibly flustered] It's not your honor. The Unsafe Handgun Act is focused on... in laymen's terms bringing new handguns to market.

Do they actually seriously believe this? Is that their official justification for passing these laws?

I have formal quotes from news interviews with some politicians who "wrote" (rather, had ghost-written) the legislation. They explicitly said it was to 'get rid of guns from our state'. If there is one thing I can not tolerate, it is blatant hypocrisy. It is fine if they have a belief in something and follow their convictions. It is another when they are in a willful state of cognitive dissonance.

I hate to make the analogy as it appears to cheapen the message, but Orwell discussed exactly this idea when he described "doublethink". I sincerely hope (and expect) these judges are at least aware of the obviousness of this from the ADA's responses. They are well read, well educated individuals. If they turn a blind eye to this it would throw any semblance of their impartiality out the window.

As a quote I heard once said, "I can live with being a pawn if the game makes sense!"

[Librarian]

I like my Glocks having one, personally. NOT for checking to see if the chamber is empty (that's what eyes and fingers are for), but rather for checking to make sure the chamber is loaded, before I put it in my holster. My chamber is nearly always loaded, but it's nice to be able to see at a glance that I haven't unloaded it at some point and forgotten.

In that regard, it's more of a "chamber is empty" warning

For that, we have the 'press check' - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JU68wjU5b80

[CandG]

All the LCIs need to go - as has been often advised, an LCI must be replaced by training: 'don't point guns at people'. (or at most other stuff)

I like my Glocks having one, personally. NOT for checking to see if the chamber is empty (that's what eyes and fingers are for), but rather for checking to make sure the chamber is loaded, before I put it in my holster. My chamber is nearly always loaded, but it's nice to be able to see at a glance that I haven't unloaded it at some point and forgotten.

In that regard, it's more of a "chamber is empty" warning

[SantaCabinetguy]

All the LCIs need to go - as has been often advised, an LCI must be replaced by training: 'don't point guns at people'. (or at most other stuff)

[Librarian]

Yep, those LCI's need to go.

So it would be nice if, at the very least, LCI's such as Glocks were approved.

All the LCIs need to go - as has been often advised, an LCI must be replaced by training: 'don't point guns at people'. (or at most other stuff)

[EM2]

Unless I'm missing something, there's absolutely no evidence that the off-roster handguns that are in common use in the rest of the states, are in fact less safe than those approved by the CA DOJ. I think that's the part that Alan Gura missed when they were talking about cars and airbags. I don't think anyone would argue that airbags and seat belts do save lives, but I think it's pretty obvious that an off-roster 1911 is by no means less safe or more dangerous than pretty much the same 1911 that is still on the roster.

Or the same exact one that fell off the roster recently only because the extortion, er, fee was not renewed.
Or somehow these off roster firearms are safe enough for law enforcement and not for us.

[CandG]

This? Holy Crud, that is hideous. What makes people think that anyone not capable of handling a gun safely, will suddenly handle it safely just because of that though?

Yep, those LCI's need to go.

So it would be nice if, at the very least, LCI's such as Glocks were approved.

[cire raeb]

This? Holy Crud, that is hideous. What makes people think that anyone not capable of handling a gun safely, will suddenly handle it safely just because of that though?

Indeed that is hideous. I am fine with something subtle like the LCI on the M9 Beretta and Glock's. I would then present the argument that the LCI requirement impede firearm development as we all know that in 3-5 years the majority of the firearms sold are going to have MOS plates for red dot sight. The LCI safety negates the very purpose of handguns, a self defense tool. Furthermore, if the attacking assailant can see the LCI, it may endanger the victim as Kalifornia's laws discourage keeping a firearm loaded.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LowThudd]

I'm ok with an LCI, as long as it isn't required to be a huge hideous bright red flag that sticks up. My glocks have an LCI, and my Beretta has an LCI - both are indicated by whether or not the extractor is sticking out. The beretta extractor is even pained red on the sides, for just such a reason.

If they concede that those sorts of LCI's are fine, then I'm not totally against it. I hate having things mandated, but if that's all we have to have then I can live with it.

MY new Sig has a "california" LCI, and it's ridiculous. Bright red, takes up half the length of the slide, with giant text laser-etched into the slide that says "loaded when up" TWICE, plus a big arrow pointing at it for some reason. That's overkill and unnecessary, I think we can all agree.

This? Holy Crud, that is hideous. What makes people think that anyone not capable of handling a gun safely, will suddenly handle it safely just because of that though?

[SantaCabinetguy]

I'm ok with an LCI, as long as it isn't required to be a huge hideous bright red flag that sticks up. My glocks have an LCI, and my Beretta has an LCI - both are indicated by whether or not the extractor is sticking out. The beretta extractor is even pained red on the sides, for just such a reason.

If they concede that those sorts of LCI's are fine, then I'm not totally against it. I hate having things mandated, but if that's all we have to have then I can live with it....

This can prove difficult for some manufacturers if they utilize an LCI in their design that does not meet the following criteria (Glock's LCI extractor does not meet CCR requirements...)

CCR 4060 outlines the requirements for an LCI.

(d)(1) A functioning chamber load indicator must meet all of the following conditions:
(A) Explanatory text and/or graphics either incorporated within the chamber load indicator or adjacent to the chamber load indicator is/are permanently displayed by engraving, stamping, etching, molding, casting, or other means of permanent marking.
(B) Each letter of explanatory text must have a minimum height of 1/16 inch.
(C) The explanatory text and/or graphics shall be of a distinct visual contrast to that of the firearm.
(D) The “loaded” indication, that portion of the chamber load indicator that visually indicates there is a round in the chamber, shall be of a distinct color contrast to the firearm.
(E) Only when there is a round in the chamber, the “loaded” indication is visible on the firearm from a distance of at least twenty-four inches. When there is no round in the chamber, the “loaded” indication must not be visible.
(F) The text and/or graphics and the “loaded” indication together inform a reasonably foreseeable adult user of the pistol, that a round is in the chamber, without requiring the user to refer to a user's manual or any other resource other than the pistol itself.

[CandG]

Will the ruling be "all or nothing" or could the judges reject part of the roster' requirements? Sounded like they are opened to keeping the hideous LCI feature.

I'm ok with an LCI, as long as it isn't required to be a huge hideous bright red flag that sticks up. My glocks have an LCI, and my Beretta has an LCI - both are indicated by whether or not the extractor is sticking out. The beretta extractor is even pained red on the sides, for just such a reason.

If they concede that those sorts of LCI's are fine, then I'm not totally against it. I hate having things mandated, but if that's all we have to have then I can live with it.

MY new Sig has a "california" LCI, and it's ridiculous. Bright red, takes up half the length of the slide, with giant text laser-etched into the slide that says "loaded when up" TWICE, plus a big arrow pointing at it for some reason. That's overkill and unnecessary, I think we can all agree.