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

[cire raeb]

I am concern is that Libtards may concede by not challenging micro stamping knowing that they will lose at the SCOTUS level They may settle on LCI & MSD and walk away with smirks on their faces.

[CandG]

I am concern is that Libtards may concede by not challenging micro stamping knowing that they will lose at the SCOTUS level They may settle on LCI & MSD and walk away with smirks on their faces.

Why would they care if they lose at the scotus level? What would they lose, beyond that which they'd be losing by conceding now?

[R-Cubed]

It was interesting to watch this over again and see the parts I missed. After a second complete view I have a better opinion of how it went over all. I wish the panel would have asked the state, where they feel the line of restriction goes too far. I found the question about banning Lugers interesting. Setting micro-stamping aside by requiring LCI and Mag disconnect they would be banning all Glocks the most popular handgun in the world. We'll see what happens, trying to hold out some hope.

[CandG]

Setting micro-stamping aside by requiring LCI and Mag disconnect they would be banning all continuing the ban on new & improved Glocks the most popular handgun in the world. We'll see what happens, trying to hold out some hope.

Minor, but important correction

[ojisan]

"Arms in common use" would certainly include Glocks and lots of other guns that do not have MDS and LCI / CLI.

[CandG]

"Arms in common use" would certainly include Glocks and lots of other guns that do not have MDS and LCI / CLI.

In addition to the most popular handgun platform for manufacturers to use for the last 100 years, the 1911.

[R-Cubed]

Minor, but important correction

True but if not for California would they still be making Gen 3 Glocks? They can't make any even minor improvements to those models.

[CandG]

True but if not for California would they still be making Gen 3 Glocks? They can't make any even minor improvements to those models.

No way to know for sure, but there was speculation in another thread recently that there's still a substantial market for them outside CA. Probably not nearly as much as gen4, but not small enough to be ignored. I think many LE contracts and such still call for gen3's. Still, gen3 ain't gonna last forever, eventually Glock will pull the plug. Probably not long after gen5 comes out.

[R-Cubed]

I'm by no means a legal expert, but my memory is the the Judge in the district court claimed that the 2A wasn't in question because there are hundreds of handguns available for sale. Basically since you have one firearm available your rights aren't being infringed. Can the 9th circuit kick it back down and say -The district judge made a mistake by saying the 2A was not in question, therefore they punt making a decision and we're back to waiting a few more months/years?

[BAJ475]

I thought the questions went well for us overall. But someone just brought up 2 words I've come to despise........

en banc

My thoughts exactly. Based on the questions the court asked and how the Deputy AG struggled, I was thinking about offering all of my off roster pistols for sale before they loose their inflated value. Then I recalled the words en banc and concluded that my optimism is probably premature if not merely overly optimistic.

[clunkmess]

Worth watching to be informed. This morning's arguments can be found on Youtube here - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ik6aPgUFA-M

Scroll forward to 1:07. The Pena caption will show in the lower right box.

Thanks.

[orangeusa]

Seemed a bit of a rhetorical exercise. The justices were aware of the major points.

I just don't understand why the list of guns available in say Texas vs. The list of guns available in CA wasn't presented.

I fear that all this will just amend existing law to remove microstamping and not adress the lack of payment on grandfathered guns (no LCI, no MD, no revolver lock).

And why was the revolver lock not addressed?

.

[orangeusa]

I'm by no means a legal expert, but my memory is the the Judge in the district court claimed that the 2A wasn't in question because there are hundreds of handguns available for sale. Basically since you have one firearm available your rights aren't being infringed. Can the 9th circuit kick it back down and say -The district judge made a mistake by saying the 2A was not in question, therefore they punt making a decision and we're back to waiting a few more months/years?

I believe that was adressed by the Justices. Gura cleverly brought up that the laws don't address safety as there are large groups of folks who are exempted by the law. Spouses of LEO's (?) ect.

.

[CandG]

Seemed a bit of a rhetorical exercise. The justices were aware of the major points.

I just don't understand why the list of guns available in say Texas vs. The list of guns available in CA wasn't presented.

I fear that all this will just amend existing law to remove microstamping and not adress the lack of payment on grandfathered guns (no LCI, no MD, no revolver lock).

And why was the revolver lock not addressed?

.

I was wondering the same thing - they mentioned MANY times how many guns are available on the roster, but it may have been helpful if they mentioned how many different models are available in the other 49 states.

I don't know what that number is, but 200-ish pistols might actually seem like a lot of choices to some people, until you mention that people in the other 49 states have over 3,000 (or whatever) different models to choose from. For some reason nobody mentioned that figure.

[lowimpactuser]

I thought the questions went well for us overall. But someone just brought up 2 words I've come to despise........

en banc