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

[RobertMW]

I can't find a quadruple face-palm. What is the federal court, if not a part of the federal government?

[JackRydden224]

Judge Ishii has ruled in our favor twice so I suppose there is a chance he'll rule in our favorite again.

Off I go to look for on roster guns I want!

[advocatusdiaboli]

... I hope some of these "edge" cases are re-examined and perhaps litigated with plaintiffs who are "interesting" to the press.

Good luck with that. I hope you are in your 20s and live to your 90s and you have a 50:50 chance maybe.

[formerTexan]

What gets me is how every time there's ANY move on "gay marriage", either for or against, it's on the national MSM, yet they were virtually SILENT all the while when the below was occurring.

It is just another example of Cultural Marxism at work, wanting to discourage the antis (of gay marriage) as fighting against history, the inevitability of "progress" and "evolution" (evolving standards of justice and evolving definitions of love & marriage), while encouraging the pros. And that's exactly why they did not and have not covered the NRA's "long march" thru dozens of statehouses to get Shall Issue passed across the country: they don't want to encourage us and they don't want to discourage the antis (gun control people).

The media do play a part in this, and the shall-issue cases in IL and DC did get a decent amount of press. However, the constitutional carry laws passed in recent years got much less national attention. On the flip side, when proposed anti-2A laws get shot down in a state, the national news won't report it, but if it was a gay rights "win" against a state law, the press will make sure you knew about it in all 50 states.

I was thinking of how to tie in gay rights with gun rights, so what if there was a gay couple who wanted to pass on a reg'ed CA AW to their child within CA? Or even allow the widow to keep a reg'ed AW if the registrant died?

I suspect that the law was written to withstand challenges on non-2A grounds, but with Heller and McDonald, I hope some of these "edge" cases are re-examined and perhaps litigated with plaintiffs who are "interesting" to the press.

[advocatusdiaboli]

No, I don't want federal oversight. I don't want state oversight. I want the freedoms I was promised when John Hancock and 38 others threw off the tyranny of England. I have to live with the terrible legislation and court system currently in place here in CA because it's here. I absolutely do not want to give this over to a larger and more megalomaniacal organization. It would be short term gain for us and a long term disaster for our children.

Many of us agree. But, more and more, it looks like to only way to get as close as you can to them is to vacate Kommiefornia.

Many Jews ignored the message of Kristallnacht and paid dearly for it. We have had no such watershed event to warn us expressly and so many continue to rationalize and hold out hope and will stay too long. A few more years for me and I make my escape to liberty. This decision is the point of return return for me.

[advocatusdiaboli]

They're just creating a black market. You and I come here because we obey the law. Many do not. I personally know of two guys who will never use credit or debit for gun or ammo purchases. It's hard for me to condemn them, for they do what all free men should do, if prematurely.

And they'll do a dime and a nickel with the Feds if they ever use it in self-defense and get caught or are otherwise checked by LEOs. That's not liberty.

[Rastoff]

It would be federal court, not federal government.

I can't find a quadruple face-palm. What is the federal court, if not a part of the federal government?

Yes, I understand the sentiment, but the reality is not better. It's the same kind of incrementalism we have with gun laws here only on a much larger scale. Give the feds control over one aspect and then they take control over others.

Remember this:
"It's no big deal, we just want to make you wait for handguns."
"Well, since you're waiting for handguns, why not add long guns?"
"This list is not to regulate gun sales, it's to make you safer. Isn't that a good thing?"
"Yeah, we only want to register handguns. This will make you safer by helping us solve more crimes."
"Look, you're already registering handguns so, registering long guns is no big deal, right?"
On and on it goes.

That's just in CA.

Now give control over the gun control issue to the federal court. This makes the CA court ineffective on this issue. Then they expand it to another issue and then another. Next thing you know there is no state court, only federal. Follow this logic through and the identity of the state dissolves.

Before you accuse me of being a tin-foil-hat wearing psychopath, look at the history of the US. We said, "Oh, they'll never do that" so often we were caught with our collective pants down when "they" actually did it to us.

No, I don't want federal oversight. I don't want state oversight. I want the freedoms I was promised when John Hancock and 38 others threw off the tyranny of England. I have to live with the terrible legislation and court system currently in place here in CA because it's here. I absolutely do not want to give this over to a larger and more megalomaniacal organization. It would be short term gain for us and a long term disaster for our children.

[advocatusdiaboli]

Ah thank God it's over though. We finally get to move on to a circuit panel...I think? Dismissed sounds like we can't appeal?

Yeah. With any luck, we'll get a ruling from the 9th by 2020 and then get in front of SCOTUS by 2025 (if we are still alive) and they'll rule (if they don't reject) by 2027. Excuse me if I don't cheer.

[Steemax]

Dissapointing... I'll be long dead before we see any sort of Shall issue, banishing of the roster, or no 1 in 30 day/10 day wait.

Why is California even part of the USA? I'm surpised I don't need a passport to leave this crappy state and enter the real states.

[Sikvenum93]

Wait, what? You want the federal government to have MORE control over the individual states? Did you read what you just wrote? Seriously?

In this case for this issue, that wouldn't be a bad idea. You know that federal firearms laws are so much more liberal than CA state laws right?

[canadagoose]

Wait, what? You want the federal government to have MORE control over the individual states? Did you read what you just wrote? Seriously?

It would be federal court, not federal government. Basically a preapproval process on new firearm laws to ensure they don't violate the 2nd. We could still litigate the laws they're allowed to pass.

Or perhaps you like the current scheme where they keep passing more restrictions that take us 5 - 10 years to strike down?

I don't see a down side to slowing the accumulation of BS laws here in California.

[Rastoff]

I'd love to see California put under Federal oversight for all new firearm laws due to a pattern of civil rights violation. Kind of like they did for voting laws in the south.

Wait, what? You want the federal government to have MORE control over the individual states? Did you read what you just wrote? Seriously?

[cire raeb]

I would never wish harm upon the judge, but I will say that I am absolutely sure that she is being protected by guns tonight.

And I'm wondering if those guns are on the roster.

I could care less if she gets hit by a bus. This b$&ch sat on the case for months, if not years, to run the clock.

[canadagoose]

The whole thing seems like a crap shoot to me.
The court systems are obviously full of corrupt judges, but we keep hoping to eventually find one who will do the right thing.
And when that happens, the ruling is immediately stayed, so other corrupt judges can figure out the best way to defeat it.

6 years in on this one case and more garbage laws passed every year.
Seems hopeless.

I'd love to see California put under Federal oversight for all new firearm laws due to a pattern of civil rights violation. Kind of like they did for voting laws in the south.

[joe4702]

The whole thing seems like a crap shoot to me.
The court systems are obviously full of corrupt judges, but we keep hoping to eventually find one who will do the right thing.
And when that happens, the ruling is immediately stayed, so other corrupt judges can figure out the best way to defeat it.

6 years in on this one case and more garbage laws passed every year.
Seems hopeless.