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

[Rastoff]

There's no leverage to compel changes.

Lots of different kinds of leverage in the world.

[Nor*Cal]

Someone just posted in the handgun section that Coonan Inc. announced at Shot Show that they have successfully added microstamping to some new 1911's in accordance with CA law.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=1419243

[Paladin]

This is a civil case, not a criminal case. No one's freedom is at stake, just their liberty to buy the handgun they want.

This is an appeal, not a trial. We're not waiting for jurors to decide about facts, but judges deciding about law/justice.

We're not talking about someone convicted being on death row for decades. It hasn't even been a year since oral arguments.

I didn't say give the judges a blank check, only that I won't get antsy until Oct 01 -- another 8+ months.

But, everyone, please feel free to ignore me and be if that makes you feel better....

As for me: Pena does not directly affect me and I can't directly affect it, so I'll be until Librarian edits the tread title to say the decision has been released.

I think this is one of the great failings of the populace in the 21st century; letting the wheels of justice grind away.

The founding fathers understood the value of a speedy trial to the accused. This is necessary because their life is passing by and we have limited time on this earth. Time is the one commodity that can never be traded and never increases. So, a long trial or wait for a trial is tantamount to being found guilty right away.

The right to a speedy trial doesn't apply to matters of legislation. They always go against us because they go into affect immediately and then take decades to overturn NO MATTER HOW UNCONSTITUTIONAL THEY ARE.

Look at the microstamping issue. We held it off for a few years, but its enactment is a 100% gun ban which is 100% unconstitutional both in the concept of fair trade and the 2A.

No, I don't agree with being patient. It is our right and our duty to show the powers-that-be that we're fed up with their condescending attitude toward our rights. We need to force them to do their jobs. Stop taking vacations every other week and just get it done. I don't know how to do it, but the time for patiently waiting is past.

[AdamVIP]

So is the ultimate answer to these that in order to fight them we need to find defendants prosecuted for such items so it is a criminal case instead of a civil one? I realize no one ever wants to be the test case but perhaps speeding up the process may even make better use of donation monies. Legal fees paid for and bonds covered for a year must be cheaper than the current 9 years we are approaching on this case.

Has anyone been prosecuted for a handgun roster violation?

[Librarian]

Has anyone been prosecuted for a handgun roster violation?

Hard to tell -

32000.

(a) A person in this state who manufactures or causes to be manufactured, imports into the state for sale, keeps for sale, offers or exposes for sale, gives, or lends an unsafe handgun shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year.

Misdemeanor convictions seldom get appealed.

[p7m8jg]

Hard to tell - Misdemeanor convictions seldom get appealed.

Very true, and when they do get appealed, it first goes to an appellate division of the exact same Superior Court in the County where the conviction occurred, not a state appellate court. Nobody spends the $$$ to go further, typically.

[Ultralight]

Proposition to remove the roster

Would it be possible to gather signatures for a proposition to simply ban the roster? Similar to the current movement to repeal the recent gas tax increases?
Then it could get on the ballot for voters to decide.

[CaliforniaLiberal]

Would it be possible to gather signatures for a proposition to simply ban the roster? Similar to the current movement to repeal the recent gas tax increases?

You are not the first to suggest countering CA Legislature gun control laws with the Proposition process. This has been discussed fairly regularly on CalGuns for the 10 years I have been here.

The consensus seems to be that this is a great idea if it passes the voters but a lousy idea if it fails. A failure is an endorsement of the Anti-Second Amendment position by the voters.

It seems that CA voters are inclined in favor of Gun Control.

Also you would need, wise CalGuns heads say, a couple of million bucks to get an effective signature gathering campaign started, more money to finish it, and more money still to run advertising in support of the Gun Rights Proposition.

Money is the fuel for the political process.


I searched Calguns Custom Search:

https://cse.google.com/cse/home?cx=0...78:pzxbzjzh1zk

with the following

"gather signatures for propositions"

and got lots of hits.

Here's a thread from 2013 for example:

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/a.../t-821797.html

[abinsinia]

I think an initiative could work if you took the stance that the roster is limiting because people can't find a gun to fit their hand, or recoil sensitivity. Also if you keep the roster, but allow off roster gun sales, except the FFL has to explain to the person buying an off roster gun that the safety features aren't part of the gun. It seems like it would be common sense to people.

[Ultralight]

The consensus seems to be that this is a great idea if it passes the voters but a lousy idea if it fails. A failure is an endorsement of the Anti-Second Amendment position by the voters.

It seems that CA voters are inclined in favor of Gun Control.

Also you would need, wise CalGuns heads say, a couple of million bucks to get an effective signature gathering campaign started, more money to finish it, and more money still to run advertising in support of the Gun Rights Proposition.

Money is the fuel for the political process.

True.
Having millions of people like my mother-in-law (anti-2nd Amendment) voting on this matter would probably be a bad thing.

[CandG]

It seems like it would be common sense to people.

And therein lies the problem. Not only do most voters lack common sense, but most of them don't even understand what the term means. Their propaganda regularly attaches the phrase to just about everything that is, in fact, not common sense at all.

See this 2007 huffpo Microstamping article that says California needs "to take a common-sense step toward ending gun violence and illegal gun trafficking." Yes, they really think that microstamping is common sense... Because they don't think.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-helmke/its-time-to-pass-microsta_b_61407.html

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

[Paladin]

56 pages of posts...

Does anyone remember the composition of the panel hearing this? Dem:Repub nominated judges? Our odds of winning/losing?

[Librarian]

56 pages of posts...

Does anyone remember the composition of the panel hearing this? Dem:Repub nominated judges? Our odds of winning/losing?

https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/media/view_video.php?pk_vid=0000011228

Case Panel:
WALLACE (Nixon), McKEOWN (Clinton), BYBEE (Bush)

[abinsinia]

And therein lies the problem. Not only do most voters lack common sense, but most of them don't even understand what the term means. Their propaganda regularly attaches the phrase to just about everything that is, in fact, not common sense at all.

See this 2007 huffpo Microstamping article that says California needs "to take a common-sense step toward ending gun violence and illegal gun trafficking." Yes, they really think that microstamping is common sense... Because they don't think.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-helmke/its-time-to-pass-microsta_b_61407.html

We're the only ones that read HuffPo, your idea of "common sense" is more of a caricature than anything real. The vast majority of people don't follow these issue closely at all. Most people (even in California) do think that U.S. citizens should be able to own guns, if the list is so limited that you can't get one I think people might be willing to change the law.

[Paladin]

https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/media/v...vid=0000011228


Case Panel:
WALLACE (Nixon), McKEOWN (Clinton), BYBEE (Bush)

Thanks, Librarian.

Hmm. Some of Nixon's were good, some bad. It wasn't until Bork that the Right realized how the Left had weaponized the federal courts.

Bybee was a GWB appointee, so that's one likely anti (McKeown) and one likely pro (Bybee), so I won't even guess if we'll win or not with Wallace.

ETA: Watched (rewatched?) the oral arguments. I am more optimistic. From 30:00 onward is the meat. Wallace cuts to the core re. microstamping not being a safety per se issue, but an aid to LE investigators. So I'm putting him on our side.

Depending upon how the court chooses to approach the case (42:25 and following), I could see microstamping shot down (not consumer safety of gun, but public safety of aiding LE), CLI upheld (via "evolving" standards of safety), but not sure which way they (the majority?) will go on MDM.