Rammifications of Nordyke on Pena???

[FABIO GETS GOOSED!!!]

This is the only gun in history actually named by the Supreme Court as being constitutionally protected.

If they had actually named it, you'd have a better argument.

[stag1500]

For the life of me I don't know why they are arguing that the right handed glock cannot be operated, it's not true at all. As for the other plaintiffs, all their declarations say is basically "I want this gun" or "I want that gun" with no attempt to demonstrate how their inability to purchase that gun is detrimental exercise of the right to keep and bear arms for self-defense. IMO this is the big failing of the roster lawsuit as currently alleged.

Banning a handgun that has a different finish than one that is on the roster or different variants of a rostered gun (the HK USPs come to mind) is arbitrary and capricious. The Second Amendment is now, explicitly, a fundamental right.

[FABIO GETS GOOSED!!!]

Banning a handgun that has a different finish than one that is on the roster or different variants of a rostered gun (the HK USPs come to mind) is arbitrary and capricious. The Second Amendment is now, explicitly, a fundamental right.

Plug the facts into the Nordyke IV framework. I can buy a black gun but I can't buy a mechanically identical two-tone gun, same make and model. How does this burden the exercise of the right to keep and bear arms for self-defense?

[choprzrul]

I take it that fgg made it out of the penalty box and is again clogging up threads......I'll continue to ignore......


This, and subsequent decisions, are exactly why ALL pro-gun people need to register as democrats. There are far too many places where someone with an (R) behind their name will never win a general election. We must stand up a viable pro-gun democrat candidate that we can then vote for in the primary. I see this as the only way to get the entrenched establishment anti-gun legislators voted out of office. A few election cycles of anti-gunners getting the boot will go a long ways towards improving our political environment.

Now, do I dare remove fgg from my ignore list?

.

[stag1500]

Plug the facts into the Nordyke IV framework. I can buy a black gun but I can't buy a mechanically identical two-tone gun, same make and model. How does this burden the exercise of the right to keep and bear arms for self-defense?

That's obviously something SCOTUS will have to address.

[FABIO GETS GOOSED!!!]

I take it that fgg made it out of the penalty box and is again clogging up threads......I'll continue to ignore......

Please feel free to continue the ignoring! I have consistently and accurately predicted for a couple years now how Nordyke was going to play out in the 9th circuit, which you can't say for some of the other folks on this board lol.

[OleCuss]

I'm kinda curious as to how many pistols on the roster fit a small hand very well?

My wife has very small hands and it has been a pain trying to find a pistol that fits well in her hand. I'd think that the Gen 4 Glock would fit her hand very nicely. . .

Anyway, we've not made an exhaustive search for rostered guns which will fit a small hand - and I'm pretty sure my wife wouldn't want to go to court over the matter, but if it is an issue for others?

[tommyid1]

I'm not so sure about combatting the roster based on the dissability scenario anymore. Id think the common use language in heller would be a better avenue. I don't think it would positively affect other pursuits in arms such as suppressors full auto etc and might actually be detrimental to them and the ultimate preservation and exteension of firearms rights. Basically what we were looking for here I think is a way to severely curtail gun control laws now and in the future. I'm not sure how we are going to do that save for overwhelming public sentiment or an extreemely vocal minority.

Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk

[stix213]

We need to find someone who, for physical reasons, NEEDS an off roster handgun to defend themselves. Maybe someone with no right hand that needs lefty controls that aren't on the roster.

Plaintiff Roy Vargas, already part of the case, was born without a right hand and cannot purchase the ambidextrous Glock he wants. Seems like a substantial burden for him. Try releasing the slide on a standard Glock using only your left hand if you think this isn't a burden.

Claims just based on wanting a pistol that is off roster by those completely able to use other pistols certainly won't rise to the level of substantial burden.

I could see the Heller common use language possibly working when seeking a pocket sized .380ACP. Pistols like the LCP, P3AT, and P238 are very popular right now and none are on the roster or anything that quite compares.

[CHS]

Claims just based on wanting a pistol that is off roster by those completely able to use other pistols certainly won't rise to the level of substantial burden.

Sure it will. The Supreme Court said in Heller that firearms cannot be barred based on arbitrary or capricious terms. The roster is nothing but arbitrary and capricious. Even firearms that WERE on the roster can no longer be on the roster if fees don't get paid every 5 years. A firearm that was once deemed "not unsafe" automatically becomes "unsafe" if a fee isn't paid. That's the very definition of arbitrary and capricious. The same goes with having minimum safety standards (like magazine disconnects and loaded chamber indicators) for new guns, but which exempt guns already on the roster. So Kimber 1911's can be on the roster, but the new (identical) Ruger 1911 or Remington 1911 can't be.

The state will argue that it's all for "safety" yet they will not be able to prove that ANYTHING about the roster is about safety except perhaps for the drop testing. Everything else has nothing to do with safety and everything to do about restricting firearms in common use through arbitrary and capricious measures.

And again, the firearm owned by Dick Heller that the Supreme Court ORDERED Washington D.C. to register for him, cannot be bought and sold into California due to the roster. If the Supreme Court thinks that gun is protected by the 2A, then California must also honor that. One of the Pena plaintiffs is trying to buy that exact gun.

[tommyid1]

Only problem is I think it would be too easy for the court to look at roy vargas and say sorry go buy another pistol with ambidextrous safety/ mag release because there are plenty of them on the roster. I don't trust that the courts will see the injustice for what it is. I have all the faith in cgf but none in thee courts.

Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk

[FABIO GETS GOOSED!!!]

The Supreme Court said in Heller that firearms cannot be barred based on arbitrary or capricious terms.

Where exactly does it say that?

[bwiese]

We need to find someone who, for physical reasons, NEEDS an off roster handgun to defend themselves. Maybe someone with no right hand that needs lefty controls that aren't on the roster.

That fine individual is already a plaintiff.

And, amongst others, there's a plaintiff that wants the exact same handgun the US Supremes said Dick Heller had a right to acquire/possess.

Originally, the case was stayed for incorporation issues but then McDonald was handed down.

We really just needed McDonald; the wait for Nordyke was puzzling but not worth fighting a big dustup over...

[FABIO GETS GOOSED!!!]

And, amongst others, there's a plaintiff that wants the exact same handgun the US Supremes said Dick Heller had a right to acquire/possess.

IMO that's the first argument that's going to get thrown out the window in Pena. Heller said he had a right to purchase a handgun, and that handguns as a general class of arm were protected. The opinion never even mentions what handgun Heller wanted to register. It's another example of a plaintiff wanting a handgun for some reason other than self-defense, the declaration doesn't even try to establish a link.

What I find most puzzling about Pena is that not only is there almost no attempt to link the desire to purchase the particular firearms to self-defense, the filings by the plaintiffs provide everything a court would need to find no substantial burden because of "alternative channels" -- the complaint lists all the alternative firearms, points out that the glock can be easily and cheaply retrofitted for an ambi mag release, etc. -- and on top of that provides all the empirical data necessary to justify safety testing, mag release disconnects, etc., under heightened scrutiny! (There's also a little oops where the plaintiffs ask the court to judicially notice an article then they attach the wrong article). This case is a real head-scratcher.

[Ubermcoupe]

IMHO, because Nordyke affirmed the Govt's ability to regulate weapons (up to de facto ban) the roster challenge will need to get creative to be successful. Hopefully some of the legal minds have a way to work within/through/around the Norkyke precedence.