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

[BAJ475]

It has long been possible to sue a manufacturer for a defective product. The idea that the state ought to get involved in certifying a gun as 'not unsafe', instead of relying on product safety laws, is nuts.

The state might, instead, have created the performance evaluation criteria, explained why those are the 'right' criteria, and sued/helped to sue manufacturers on behalf of specific injured parties.

We got lists and crimes and bureaucracy and political posturing.

Agreed. But how about the total lack of evidence that any banned firearm would fail the drop test or that LCIs and Mag disconnects have, in fact, prevented any actual harm? Without such actual evidence any result based on legislative intent cannot be said to be anything other than interest balancing, which is prohibited by Heller. To me, the best argument for taking Pena is to put an end to the two step approach that, although not directly prohibited by Heller, is nothing more than interest balancing, which Heller disapproved.

[Offwidth]

.. of suckling babes.

I like suckling babes.

[Offwidth]

Wasn't the original list about being able to sustain a drop from something like 3 feet and not accidentally discharge? That sounds like being safety-related. The problem is that the original intent got perverted along the way and now the list is purely about a back-door ban.

Nothing was perverted. This was the intention to control handgun availability from the get-go. They played the long game. That is what socialists do.

[taperxz]

There is no good or bad information. You dont get it yet? They don’t want guns. Whether lies or truth, they don’t care. You can’t educate people that don’t want to be educated. You really think you could present true facts to Gavin and all of a sudden because you spoke the truth, he would all of a sudden be pro gun? That’s the same with the average idiot here in California. Well, the average idiots along the coast anyways. The only way things change significantly here is if god decides to pull the rip cord on the San Andreas fault.

I own two gun stores. I educate new gun owners every day. Next?

[jcwatchdog]

Meanwhile, the left makes up lies to pass gun control and the sheep believe it all because they have been told to believe and uninformed gun people give them bad information and argue with them uninformed.

[divert_fuse]

What concerns me in the reply is

Although this strikes me as just posturing, I'm wondering if it has teeth. That is, insofar as Pena doesn't explicitly ask the court to overturn the summary judgment, it gets rejected for something analogous to "failure to state a claim." Had he both advanced his broader 2A theory and said the summary judgment was inappropriate, the court could ignore the broader 2A issues (which I imagine they will, and just deal with them in NYSRPA), and overturn the summary judgment and remand the factual stuff to the lower courts. But since he didn't, we're SOL.

This seems unlikely in a common-sense way. The feasability of microstamping and the inappropriate summary judgment are issues because of 2A, either the "broad" (i.e. accurate) theory of 2A advanced by Pena or less broad versions. I don't think SCOTUS has to (and I imagine won't) endorse Pena's particular theory in order to overturn the summary judgment. But I might be wrong about this, and I'd be interested to hear better-informed opinions.

[taperxz]

Meanwhile, the left makes up lies to pass gun control and the sheep believe it all because they have been told to believe and uninformed gun people give them bad information and argue with them uninformed.

[jcwatchdog]

Uh, Ya. OK.

Lets keep people ignorant and encourage them to make false claims about what is going on. Shut up and donate attitude?

[CZebra]

What's next?



1) In a matter of weeks, the briefs will be distributed to the justices for them to consider at their next conference. When they briefs are distributed, the Court will update its summary page to indicate that the briefs have been distributed for a specific conference (i.e., the date of the conference will be published).



2) If we're really lucky, the Court will grant cert! The Court will then schedule the case for oral arguments. Various anti-civil liberty advocates will weep and rip hair out of the scalp and cry to the heavens that SCOTUS is endangering the safety of suckling babes.



2a) If we're lucky, the Court will relist the petition for consideration at the next conference. Go back to 2 for the next conference.



2b) If we're unlucky, the Court will deny the petition. Various freedom loving people will weep and rip hair out of their scalp and cry to the heavens that SCOTUS is treating the 2d Amendment like a red-headed step child.

This.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Librarian]

Wasn't the original list about being able to sustain a drop from something like 3 feet and not accidentally discharge? That sounds like being safety-related. The problem is that the original intent got perverted along the way and now the list is purely about a back-door ban.

It has long been possible to sue a manufacturer for a defective product. The idea that the state ought to get involved in certifying a gun as 'not unsafe', instead of relying on product safety laws, is nuts.

The state might, instead, have created the performance evaluation criteria, explained why those are the 'right' criteria, and sued/helped to sue manufacturers on behalf of specific injured parties.

We got lists and crimes and bureaucracy and political posturing.

[Kukuforguns]

The petition for a writ of certiorari should be denied.

now what?

What's next?

1) In a matter of weeks, the briefs will be distributed to the justices for them to consider at their next conference. When they briefs are distributed, the Court will update its summary page to indicate that the briefs have been distributed for a specific conference (i.e., the date of the conference will be published).

2) If we're really lucky, the Court will grant cert! The Court will then schedule the case for oral arguments. Various anti-civil liberty advocates will weep and rip hair out of the scalp and cry to the heavens that SCOTUS is endangering the safety of suckling babes.

2a) If we're lucky, the Court will relist the petition for consideration at the next conference. Go back to 2 for the next conference.

2b) If we're unlucky, the Court will deny the petition. Various freedom loving people will weep and rip hair out of their scalp and cry to the heavens that SCOTUS is treating the 2d Amendment like a red-headed step child.

[taperxz]

Uh, Ya. OK.

Lets keep people ignorant and encourage them to make false claims about what is going on. Shut up and donate attitude?

[jcwatchdog]

Try reading the material. For court cases its imperative to help you understand what is going on.

[aBrowningfan]

It was never about safety, nor was it sold as such to the Gubernator. Instead it was sold as a way to help the police solve gun crimes by being able to identify the handguns used in shootings by the expended casings. Being a "law and order" kind of a guy, he just had to sign it. Cameltoe "determined" that he technology existed to implement the law, and no one has challenged her determination despite a lack of evidence that the technology complied with the law. The use of different machinery (CNC versus casting and finishing) was another of the Cameltoe's edicts, which expanded the use of the term "new." Because she hates guns and, Mr. and Mrs, Amrerica, if you don't turn them in, we will ban them and seize them wheneverwe can.

Wasn't the original list about being able to sustain a drop from something like 3 feet and not accidentally discharge? That sounds like being safety-related. The problem is that the original intent got perverted along the way and now the list is purely about a back-door ban.

[taperxz]

Cool. I mean I was expecting a better response than F*** you because we can.

Im not into law or nothing but whats the time frame now on something like this to get to the SCOTUS to be reviewed?

Thanks for the info I am new and yall are helping me learn

Try reading the material. For court cases its imperative to help you understand what is going on.