Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

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

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • advocatusdiaboli
    Calguns Addict
    • Sep 2009
    • 5521

    Originally posted by Maestro Pistolero
    Correct. The one handgun in the world specifically mentioned by the SCOTUS as coming under 2A protection is deemed unsafe and prohibited in CA.

    Yep, it's that F'd up.
    Technically, all handguns now unsafe are since none are manufactured to support micro-stamping. They are only grandfathered in with the micro-stamping exemption for a short time until they are modified enough to require retesting.
    Benefactor Life Member NRA, Life Member CRPA, CGN Contributor, US Army Veteran, Black Ribbon in Memoriam for the deceased 2nd Amendment
    sigpic

    Comment

    • wireless
      Veteran Member
      • May 2010
      • 4346

      I believe you guys. I'm just curious if anyone knows the make and model.

      Comment

      • Maestro Pistolero
        Veteran Member
        • Apr 2009
        • 3897

        Smith and Wesson Revolver Model 442

        Industry Contact: Gary Giudice Blue Heron Communications (800) 654-3766 gary@blueheroncomm.com Second Amendment Foundation Alan Gottlieb (425) 454-7012 Second Amendment Foundation and Smith & Wesson Partner on Commemorative Revolver Engraved Model 442 Will Recognize District of Columbia vs. Heller Decision SPRINGFIELD, Mass. (July, 21, 2008) – The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) and Smith & Wesson have
        www.christopherjhoffman.com

        The Second Amendment is the one right that is so fundamental that the inability to exercise it, should the need arise, would render all other rights null and void. Dead people have no rights.
        Magna est veritas et praevalebit

        Comment

        • malfunction
          Member
          • Jul 2012
          • 410

          I believe it was a nine-shot revolver, that seems to be confirmed here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...071801212.html

          He was not allowed to register his 1911 as it apparently qualified as a machine gun in DC
          Originally posted by kcbrown
          What we have in practice is a legal system, not a justice system.
          sigpic

          Comment

          • canadagoose
            Member
            • Oct 2009
            • 111

            I thought that revolvers were exempt from the CA list. Is that not true?

            Comment

            • thayne
              Senior Member
              • Jun 2010
              • 2289

              Originally posted by canadagoose
              I thought that revolvers were exempt from the CA list. Is that not true?
              Not true
              "It wasn't a failure of laws," said Amanda Wilcox, who along with her husband, Nick, lobbies for the California chapter of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. "I just don't see how our gun laws could have stopped something like that."

              Comment

              • taperxz
                I need a LIFE!!
                • Feb 2010
                • 19395

                Originally posted by malfunction
                I believe it was a nine-shot revolver, that seems to be confirmed here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...071801212.html

                He was not allowed to register his 1911 as it apparently qualified as a machine gun in DC
                Thats the revolver he was registering when the press was there for his first registration. Not the gun that was involved in the court case.

                Comment

                • narcolepsy
                  Junior Member
                  • Feb 2012
                  • 44

                  My understanding is that single action revolvers are exempt.

                  Originally posted by canadagoose
                  I thought that revolvers were exempt from the CA list. Is that not true?

                  Comment

                  • hornswaggled
                    Senior Member
                    • Feb 2011
                    • 1650

                    Microstamping requirement will help kill the roster. Not even Cuomo was dumb enough to let the "no semi-autos with >7 rounds" categorical ban part of the SAFE Act stand.
                    sigpicNRA Endowment Member
                    SAF Defender's Club

                    Comment

                    • IVC
                      I need a LIFE!!
                      • Jul 2010
                      • 17594

                      Originally posted by canadagoose
                      I thought that revolvers were exempt from the CA list. Is that not true?
                      Revolvers are exempt from LCI (loaded chamber indicator), magazine disconnect (obviously, no magazine) and microstamping. Also, *single action* revolvers over certain barrel/overall length are exempt.

                      That's probably what you had in mind.
                      sigpicNRA Benefactor Member

                      Comment

                      • IVC
                        I need a LIFE!!
                        • Jul 2010
                        • 17594

                        Originally posted by narcolepsy
                        My understanding is that single action revolvers are exempt.
                        Correct, except for barrel and overall length limits. SAE (single action exemption) is a counterpart of SSE (single shot exemption) for revolvers. I've transferred a few this way.
                        sigpicNRA Benefactor Member

                        Comment

                        • IVC
                          I need a LIFE!!
                          • Jul 2010
                          • 17594

                          Originally posted by malfunction
                          He was not allowed to register his 1911 as it apparently qualified as a machine gun in DC
                          See what happens when we don't pay attention to words?

                          Machined gun becomes machine gun... /jk
                          sigpicNRA Benefactor Member

                          Comment

                          • REH
                            CGN/CGSSA Contributor
                            CGN Contributor
                            • Feb 2009
                            • 1510

                            Originally posted by advocatusdiaboli
                            June at the earliest seems to be the consensus and it seems that nothing definitive will be accomplished then, just four more yards in a cloud of dust near mid-field.

                            So this BS will continue into the future?

                            Comment

                            • advocatusdiaboli
                              Calguns Addict
                              • Sep 2009
                              • 5521

                              Originally posted by REH
                              So this BS will continue into the future?
                              Benefactor Life Member NRA, Life Member CRPA, CGN Contributor, US Army Veteran, Black Ribbon in Memoriam for the deceased 2nd Amendment
                              sigpic

                              Comment

                              • REH
                                CGN/CGSSA Contributor
                                CGN Contributor
                                • Feb 2009
                                • 1510

                                I was not necessary looking for an opinion that would make me feel warm and fuzzy. I was only asking if this would be the final ruling, for or against. Not familiar with the court system, and it’s various levels.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                UA-8071174-1