-
-
Are you a Life Member of the NRA? Did you make a contribution since the laws were passed?Frank
One rifle, one planet, Holland's 375
Life Member NRA, CRPA and SAF -
I think Deleon is termed out once his current one expires. Wouldn't be a bad move against Gruesome though.Comment
-
He'd have to fight Newsom for it.NRA Life MemberComment
-
Please be specific. What have they done for us in PRC?Are you a Life Member of the NRA? Did you make a contribution since the laws were passed?
If you want my hard earned money, I expect results or at least the effort.
So sight some specific efforts.Comment
-
The NRA's lobbying arm, NRA-ILA, says they are going to take legal action. Do I think it will be successful? No.
But theoretically, & hopefully, it could be found unconstitutional and they could get it overturned. They'll take it to the District court, then 9th Circuit, then to the State Supreme Court, etc....
The problem is, most of the judges are all liberal in California.Comment
-
Barry Kintner Marbury v. Madison, 5 US 137: “The Constitution of these United States is the supreme law of the land. Any law that is repugnant to the Constitution is null and void of law.”
Murdock v. Penn., 319 US 105: “No state shall convert a liberty into a privilege, license it, and attach a fee to it.”
Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham, 373 US 262: “If the state converts a liberty into a privilege, the citizen can engage in the right with impunity.”
Owen v. Independence, 100 S.C.T. 1398, 445 US 622: “Officers of the court have no immunity, when violating a Constitutional right, from liability. For they are deemed to know the law.”
Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 1974: Expounds upon Owen Byers v. U.S., 273 U.S. 28 Unlawful search and seizure. Your rights must be interpreted in favor of the citizen.
Boyd v. U.S., 116 U.S. 616: “The court is to protect against any encroachment of Constitutionally secured liberties.”
Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436: “Where rights secured (Affirmed) by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation, which would abrogate them.”
Norton v. Shelby County, 118 U.S. 425: “An unconstitutional act is not law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties; affords no protection; it creates no office; it is in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed.”
Miller v. U.S., 230 F.2d. 486, 489: “The claim and exercise of a Constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime.”
Brady v. U.S., 397 U.S. 742, 748: “Waivers of Constitutional Rights, not only must they be voluntary, they must be knowingly intelligent acts done with sufficient awareness.” “If men, through fear, fraud, or mistake, should in terms renounce or give up any natural right, the eternal law of reason and the grand end of society would absolutely vacate such renunciation. The right to freedom being a gift of ALMIGHTY GOD, it is not in the power of man to alienate this gift and voluntarily become a slave.” —Samuel Adams, 1772
Cohens v. Virginia, 19 US (6 Wheat) 264, 404, 5 L.Ed 257 (1821): “When a judge acts where he or she does not have jurisdiction to act, the judge is engaged in an act or acts of treason.”
Mattox v. U.S., 156 US 237, 243: “We are bound to interpret the Constitution in the light of the law as it existed at the time it was adopted.”
S. Carolina v. U.S., 199 U.S. 437, 448 (1905): “The Constitution is a written instrument. As such, its meaning does not alter. That which it meant when it was adopted, it means now.”
“If the State converts a right (liberty) into a privilege, the citizen can ignore the license and fee and engage in the right (liberty) with impunity.” (Shuttlesworth v. City of Birmingham, Alabama, 373 U.S. 262)
Here’s our Founding Father’s take on the issue: “…the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” (Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution) That seems abundantly clear to me.
Here’s my take on the issue: All concealed carry “permits” are licenses of a right (liberty). The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in Murdock v. Pennsylvania, 319 U.S. 105 (1943) that such licenses are illegal. Furthermore, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in Shuttlesworth v. City of Birmingham, 373 U.S. 262 (1963) that citizens “can ignore the license and fee and engage in the right (liberty) with impunity.” Combined with fact that the Second Amendment clearly states the act of keeping and bearing arms is a right seems to withdraw all wiggle room for law enforcement to behave otherwise, unless the legal examiner or legislator ignores either the Constitution or the U.S. Supreme Court decision.
Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution of the United States specifies the powers of the Congress of the United States. Those powers do not include impairing the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States or any other amendment to the Constitution of the United States that guarantees rights to the people or to a state;Comment
-
One problem is gun owners that expect to be spoon fed and have their hands held.
There are a number of threads discussing the things that the NRA has been doing in California.
Perhaps folks should take an evening and read the stickies, run a couple of searches on Calguns - heck, perhaps even go to the NRA's website and do some reading there. I'd like to think that the 2nd is important enough for gun owners to invest an evening or two to do some research...
-- Michael
NRA Endowment, frequent contributor to NRA-ILA, and occasional contributor to NRA-PVF.Comment
-
I feel as though California = NRA piggy bank.Antonio Villaraigosa
Unemployed PoliticianComment
-
Haha what a goober.Stand up and be counted, or lay down and be mounted... -Mac
Comment
Tweet
There are currently 45370 users online. 52 members and 45318 guests.
Most users ever online was 65,177 at 8:20 PM on 09-21-2024.
Comment