CGF letter of opposition to City of LA Magazine Ban... (Carmen Trutanich legal FAIL)

[Californio]

My Great Great Grandfather is turning in his grave.

[1859sharps]

So CGF takes a position that this law is unconstitutional but just recently, both Brandon and Gene have said publicly that 20+ round mags could be considered hi-caps and on the table federally to be legally banned? HMMMM

In addition to wildhawker's comments to the above....

At some point the 10 round limit will be challenged, and hopefully "we" will be able to force the "other side" to have to defend where they came up with 10 rounds is "good" and 11 rounds is "hi, thus bad".

At the very least, 15 rounds has been a commonly available option in firearms since the Henry rifle of the 1860s.

So, given the Heller "in common use", I don't see how a 10 round ban can stick. greater than 10 rounds has been VERY common for over a century and well on it's way to 2 centuries of at least 15 round capacity as being "in common use".

I also agree that given 30 round capacity has been common to very common for quite a few decades BEFORE anyone seriously considered "magazine restrictions" I think there is a good argument that up to 30 rounds is constitutionally protected.

regardless of how you feel about this statement, "no right is absolute", this concept appears to be intrenched in the legal system. So, given that, we may very well find that there maybe a limit to capacity that the USSC will protect with the 2nd amendment.

While I disagree with any limit, and would not like it, I could live with a 30 round limit on magazine capacity. once you start going over 30, you do start moving into the "of not common use" area. But 1 round to 30 rounds is HIGHLY common and VERY much "in common use".

[speedrrracer]

I want to see a picture of Jason Davis holding a fat check from LA City after he pwns them in court.

[taperxz]

In addition to wildhawker's comments to the above....

At some point the 10 round limit will be challenged, and hopefully "we" will be able to force the "other side" to have to defend where they came up with 10 rounds is "good" and 11 rounds is "hi, thus bad".

At the very least, 15 rounds has been a commonly available option in firearms since the Henry rifle of the 1860s.

So, given the Heller "in common use", I don't see how a 10 round ban can stick. greater than 10 rounds has been VERY common for over a century and well on it's way to 2 centuries of at least 15 round capacity as being "in common use".

I also agree that given 30 round capacity has been common to very common for quite a few decades BEFORE anyone seriously considered "magazine restrictions" I think there is a good argument that up to 30 rounds is constitutionally protected.

regardless of how you feel about this statement, "no right is absolute", this concept appears to be intrenched in the legal system. So, given that, we may very well find that there maybe a limit to capacity that the USSC will protect with the 2nd amendment.

While I disagree with any limit, and would not like it, I could live with a 30 round limit on magazine capacity. once you start going over 30, you do start moving into the "of not common use" area. But 1 round to 30 rounds is HIGHLY common and VERY much "in common use".

If you guys want to take a page out of Alan Gottliebs book and concede things that are not even on the table or at least not what is in the best interest of gun owners, conceded away.

I will not endorse anyone who is willing to concede my rights away, flip flops on issues, starts projects without finishing them, promises things they can't deliver, or is even willing to negotiate when they are not at a table or even have been invited to negotiate with.

By posting this rhetoric here on the forum, the antis are now finding soft spots in their arguments against us.

What ever happened to "NOT ONE INCH"?