Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > POLITICS, LITIGATION AND ACTIVISM > California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism > Temp Post-Duncan Mag Forum
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #81  
Old 04-01-2019, 6:15 PM
SanDiego619's Avatar
SanDiego619 SanDiego619 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 815
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bronco75a View Post
Whose gonna know if you acquired them after the stay or not? Are you one of those people that just blurt out :"it arrived in the mail after the stay".
I am not asking if they will know. I am asking what the law is.

So far, no one has been able to answer.
__________________
Where the people fear the government you have tyranny. Where the government fears the people you have liberty.
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 04-01-2019, 6:17 PM
Christopher761 Christopher761 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 845
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SmallShark View Post
BTW, why on the first page. the filing date is 2017?
The lawsuit was filed 2017. The summ J Motion was finished and judgment on the Summ J Motion was issued 3/29/2019. If you read further on the top blue line, it says this application was filed today.
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 04-01-2019, 6:17 PM
pewpew9 pewpew9 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: SF Bay
Posts: 5
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Cool

Quote:
Originally Posted by CitaDeL View Post
Becerra seems to realize that he is closing the barn door after the horses made their escape.

Except he doesnt understand that its not just one or two LCM's but 500-750K individual magazines imported into California over the course of 4 or 5 days. He has no idea of the scope.
You guys realize this is a public forum right?
Skimming the previous two threads, where everybody declared they're ordering "ALL THE MAGS. EVERY SINGLE ONE", it's not that hard to estimate the scope of things. Also, there are many guesstimates by calgunners all over this forum
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 04-01-2019, 6:19 PM
Christopher761 Christopher761 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 845
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SanDiego619 View Post
I am not asking if they will know. I am asking what the law is.

So far, no one has been able to answer.
The law on the books is PC32310:

32310.
(a) Except as provided in Article 2 (commencing with Section 32400) of this chapter and in Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 17700) of Division 2 of Title 2, any person in this state who manufactures or causes to be manufactured, imports into the state, keeps for sale, or offers or exposes for sale, or who gives, lends, buys, or receives any large-capacity magazine is punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year or imprisonment pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170.

(b) For purposes of this section, “manufacturing” includes both fabricating a magazine and assembling a magazine from a combination of parts, including, but not limited to, the body, spring, follower, and floor plate or end plate, to be a fully functioning large-capacity magazine.

(c) Except as provided in Article 2 (commencing with Section 32400) of this chapter and in Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 17700) of Division 2 of Title 2, commencing July 1, 2017, any person in this state who possesses any large-capacity magazine, regardless of the date the magazine was acquired, is guilty of an infraction punishable by a fine not to exceed one hundred dollars ($100) per large-capacity magazine, or is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine not to exceed one hundred dollars ($100) per large-capacity magazine, by imprisonment in a county jail not to exceed one year, or by both that fine and imprisonment.

(d) Any person who may not lawfully possess a large-capacity magazine commencing July 1, 2017 shall, prior to July 1, 2017:

(1) Remove the large-capacity magazine from the state;

(2) Sell the large-capacity magazine to a licensed firearms dealer; or

(3) Surrender the large-capacity magazine to a law enforcement agency for destruction.

Last edited by Christopher761; 04-01-2019 at 6:23 PM.. Reason: added bold
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 04-01-2019, 6:19 PM
SanDiego619's Avatar
SanDiego619 SanDiego619 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 815
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by caliguy93 View Post
This is a great idea..

To issue your stay, will turn hundreds of thousands of law abiding people into a legal purgatory where they will have no choice but to leave a package at their doorstep during the entire stay??

Good Reason to use against balance of hardships requirement when opposing the motion for a stay.

States alleged harms of being difficult to remove is substantially outweighed by these folks possible harms.



Next, The 9th Circuit already ruled with the TRO that the plaintiffs, (Duncan) had a substantial likelihood of success on the Merits, Otherwise the TRO would not have been granted. Both sides can not both have a substantial likelihood of success.


Furthermore, they also say that if the ultimate decision reinstates the Penal Code, Many citizens will be forced to relinquish their mags anyways, sounds like it takes away their irreparable harm idea since we will be forced under penalty of a crime not to relinquish them.

So they don't have a substantial likelihood of success, they dont really have an irreparable harm, and the peoples potential harm of granting the stay in legal purgatory outweighs the States Harm, the only real argument they have is preserving the status Quote that the judge already says is status quote that has been created by the state, not by the citizens.

Whatever Benitez decides, the 9th will likely grant it, we can only hope for as much time between now and when it is granted.
Can we at least decorate our boxes that are sitting on our porch for months and months? We can paint them etc.
__________________
Where the people fear the government you have tyranny. Where the government fears the people you have liberty.
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 04-01-2019, 6:21 PM
Christopher761 Christopher761 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 845
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SanDiego619 View Post
Can we at least decorate our boxes that are sitting on our porch for months and months? We can paint them etc.
Maybe Jessie Smollet's friend can steal the box off my front porch.
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 04-01-2019, 6:24 PM
SanDiego619's Avatar
SanDiego619 SanDiego619 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 815
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Christopher761 View Post
The law on the books is PC32310:

32310.
(a) Except as provided in Article 2 (commencing with Section 32400) of this chapter and in Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 17700) of Division 2 of Title 2, any person in this state who manufactures or causes to be manufactured, imports into the state, keeps for sale, or offers or exposes for sale, or who gives, lends, buys, or receives any large-capacity magazine is punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year or imprisonment pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170.

(b) For purposes of this section, “manufacturing” includes both fabricating a magazine and assembling a magazine from a combination of parts, including, but not limited to, the body, spring, follower, and floor plate or end plate, to be a fully functioning large-capacity magazine.

(c) Except as provided in Article 2 (commencing with Section 32400) of this chapter and in Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 17700) of Division 2 of Title 2, commencing July 1, 2017, any person in this state who possesses any large-capacity magazine, regardless of the date the magazine was acquired, is guilty of an infraction punishable by a fine not to exceed one hundred dollars ($100) per large-capacity magazine, or is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine not to exceed one hundred dollars ($100) per large-capacity magazine, by imprisonment in a county jail not to exceed one year, or by both that fine and imprisonment.

(d) Any person who may not lawfully possess a large-capacity magazine commencing July 1, 2017 shall, prior to July 1, 2017:

(1) Remove the large-capacity magazine from the state;

(2) Sell the large-capacity magazine to a licensed firearms dealer; or

(3) Surrender the large-capacity magazine to a law enforcement agency for destruction.
Ok, so I am trying to find the exact answer here. In section (a) it says "...or receives any large-capacity magazine..."

What EXACTLY does "receive" mean? Bringing a box into your house that was delivered by USPS? Opening the box? Or when USPS puts it on the porch, does that count as receipt?

Thank you.
__________________
Where the people fear the government you have tyranny. Where the government fears the people you have liberty.
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 04-01-2019, 6:24 PM
SanDiego619's Avatar
SanDiego619 SanDiego619 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 815
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Christopher761 View Post
Maybe Jessie Smollet's friend can steal the box off my front porch.
Paint it white, put a black ski mask on it, and then put a MAGA hat on top of the ski mask.

That is actually what the idiot is saying they did. And hey, ALL CHARGES DROPPED, LIKE MAGIC!!
__________________
Where the people fear the government you have tyranny. Where the government fears the people you have liberty.
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 04-01-2019, 6:26 PM
SanDiego619's Avatar
SanDiego619 SanDiego619 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 815
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gun toting monkeyboy View Post
The thing about Pmags and many others is that they were NOT illegal to bring in as kits to "repair" older magazines. And since there was no limit on how many parts on a magazine you could replace, at the end of the process you could very well have a completely new Pmag. You were just supposed to leave the parts from the old magazine disassembled. The same thing went for all other magazines. As long as the total number of complete magazines didn't go up, you were fine.

Now, however, with the reset, you are right. You can have anything you want. AND all of those kits that were sitting around disassembled are suddenly legal to assemble. I doubt there is a disassembled kit left in the state after this weekend.

-Mb

I had a ton of unassembled mag kits that I bought before the cutoff in October 2016. I put 'em all together on Friday night, it felt good.
__________________
Where the people fear the government you have tyranny. Where the government fears the people you have liberty.
Reply With Quote
  #90  
Old 04-01-2019, 6:27 PM
mjdlc805's Avatar
mjdlc805 mjdlc805 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: California
Posts: 116
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ambis View Post
After the current buying spree large cap mags are 'now in common use' in California
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrrobot View Post
So we are free to aquire new LCM'S. Sweet.

Can we stop calling them "large capacity Magazines (LCMS)?" I know it is a legal term but you are playing right into their ideology. And Im not even talking about the 30 rounders. They are in essence "standard capacity magazines" and should be called as such. My Spingfields came standard with 16 rounders and 13 rounders, my Beretta came standard with 15 rounders, my Glocks came standard with 15 rounders and 12 rounders but instead all I got were 10 rounders that were not standard, and my shield, well that's another story.

Last edited by mjdlc805; 04-01-2019 at 7:07 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #91  
Old 04-01-2019, 6:28 PM
curtisfong's Avatar
curtisfong curtisfong is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 6,062
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mjdlc805 View Post
Can we stop calling them "large capacity Magazines (LCMS)?" I know it is a legal term but you are playing right into their ideology. And Im not even talking about the 30 rounders. They are in essence "standard capacity magazines" and should be called as such. My Spingfields came standard with 16 rounders and 13 rounders, my Beretta came standard with 15 rounders, my Glocks came standard with 15 rounders and 12 rounders and my shield, well that's another story.
I agree. If you must use the term LCM[sic], append [sic], so it is clear you are not doing it willingly.

Same with Assault Weapon[sic].
__________________
The Rifle on the Wall

"“[S]cientific proof” of both gun-rights and gun-control theories “is very hard to get”; therefore, requiring “some substantial scientific proof to show that a [firearm] law will indeed substantially reduce crime and injury” is tantamount to applying strict scrutiny to, and almost certainly will lead to invalidation of, the law." - Kamela Harris

Lawyers and their Stockholm Syndrome
Reply With Quote
  #92  
Old 04-01-2019, 6:34 PM
troyPhD troyPhD is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 187
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LVSox View Post
There is no deadline of April 5th. California is the defendant; Benitez is the judge. Benitez sets the timetables, not California. He could sit on it for weeks, or until CA goes over his head to the Ninth Circuit if he so chose.
That's what I was wondering (as a non lawyer). California is begging, and has no leverage. There is no requirement for Benitez to act one way or another?
Reply With Quote
  #93  
Old 04-01-2019, 6:35 PM
choprzrul's Avatar
choprzrul choprzrul is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Central Coast, CA
Posts: 5,953
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

Has anyone stopped to ponder that this is the mother of all weekend long April fools jokes?

Yeah I know, I’m kinda evil.....

:-)
Reply With Quote
  #94  
Old 04-01-2019, 6:37 PM
jackhole jackhole is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Aliso Viejo, CA
Posts: 10
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SanDiego619 View Post
What EXACTLY does "receive" mean?
Not sure if the legal definition is different, but:

Quote:
receive | rəˈsēv |
verb [with object]
1. be given, presented with, or paid (something): she received her prize from the manager | most businesses will receive a tax cut.
take delivery of (something sent or communicated): he received fifty inquiries after advertising the job.
• consent to formally hear (an oath or confession): he failed to find a magistrate to receive his oath.
• buy or accept goods in the knowledge that they have been stolen: a man convicted of receiving stolen property.
Reply With Quote
  #95  
Old 04-01-2019, 6:37 PM
Dubels Dubels is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 494
iTrader: 12 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Discogodfather View Post
Bercerra is making the argument, based on these cases:

"See Humane Soc’y of U.S. v. Gutierrez, 558 F.3d 896, 896 (9th Cir. 2009) (“A party seeking a stay must establish [1] that he is likely to succeed on the merits, [2] that
he is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of relief, [3] that the balance of equities tip in his favor, and [4] that a stay is in the public interest.” (citing Winter
v. Nat’l Res. Def. Council, Inc., 555 U.S. 7, 20 (2008))).
"

Love to hear what that means translated from legalise.

It seems almost laughable that he is asking Judge Benitez to grant a stay based on the idea that an influx of LCM's into CA will cause harm. Didn't the decision just make the opposite case, that NOT having LCM's cause the public harm?
Your citation is just the basic legal standard applicable to applications for stay pending appeal and merely directs the court and parties to the four factors that should be considered. Each of the prongs has their own case law interpretation that will be argued. The decision on the merits of the case plays a role in the first prong but the parties do not get to re-litigate the case or rely solely on prevailing on the merits in the lower court. The primary question is the irreparable harm that will occur should the appellant succeed and the higher court reverses or remands and a stay was not ordered. The court will attempt to balance the alleged irreparable harm against possible harm to the prevailing party in the district court if a stay is ordered.

The AG clearly points to the flood of regular capacity magazines into the state, the inability to enforce the law should the higher court deem the penal code constitutional, and the alleged increase in danger to the public as the irreparable harm. The judge is supposed to rule on the application with a forward looking mindset based on the possible scenarios of the appeal and not merely based upon his prior opinion and/or decision on the merits. Otherwise requiring appellants to make the request to the lower court first before the court of appeal would almost be completely pointless as the judge would almost always deny the request.
Reply With Quote
  #96  
Old 04-01-2019, 6:40 PM
SanDiego619's Avatar
SanDiego619 SanDiego619 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 815
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jackhole View Post
Not sure if the legal definition is different, but:
I guess if they grant a stay, I will have to leave my boxes outside until a hoodlum steals them or the stay is lifted.
__________________
Where the people fear the government you have tyranny. Where the government fears the people you have liberty.
Reply With Quote
  #97  
Old 04-01-2019, 6:40 PM
TKM's Avatar
TKM TKM is offline
567-68-0515
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: You must have really bad eyesight to think guns look phallic.
Posts: 8,551
iTrader: 68 / 100%
Default

"the State will suffer irreparable injury if LCMs are permitted to flow into the State" flow in from other states..... thus reducing the irreparable injury that the other states are currently suffering from? Stopping this flow will just cause irreparable injury to the states that would have sent LCMs to California.

States full of children!

Why does he hate the children?
__________________
‘No man is entitled to the fruits of another man’s labor.’
Reply With Quote
  #98  
Old 04-01-2019, 6:41 PM
solidfreshdope solidfreshdope is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 724
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SanDiego619 View Post
Ok, so I am trying to find the exact answer here. In section (a) it says "...or receives any large-capacity magazine..."

What EXACTLY does "receive" mean? Bringing a box into your house that was delivered by USPS? Opening the box? Or when USPS puts it on the porch, does that count as receipt?

Thank you.
I mentioned in another thread, someone should really order some mags for Becerra...
__________________
Welcome to the United Snakes.
Reply With Quote
  #99  
Old 04-01-2019, 6:41 PM
jasonjm jasonjm is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 40
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SDCarpenter View Post
Everyone I have seen didn't order just 1 mag... There legit has to be at least a million and counting
this.

I ordered from 5 places to to make sure at least one works.

4 of the 5 came through, so that means 40 mags for me
Reply With Quote
  #100  
Old 04-01-2019, 6:46 PM
SanDiego619's Avatar
SanDiego619 SanDiego619 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 815
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jackhole View Post
Not sure if the legal definition is different, but:
I just found this here https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/delivery

"Delivery to a carrier involves other rules. Where the seller is authorized or required to send the goods to the buyer, delivery of the goods to a carrier (whether named by the buyer or not) for the purpose of transmission to the buyer is prima facie deemed to be a delivery of the goods to the buyer."

So I guess if something extremely unlikely happened and it went to court, we could argue that the items were delivered once they were handed off to the carrier. So we took delivery of them already, even if they have not arrived at our houses.

I'm no lawyer, I am sure a lawyer will come read what I said and smash me with reality.
__________________
Where the people fear the government you have tyranny. Where the government fears the people you have liberty.
Reply With Quote
  #101  
Old 04-01-2019, 6:47 PM
SanDiego619's Avatar
SanDiego619 SanDiego619 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 815
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jasonjm View Post
this.

I ordered from 5 places to to make sure at least one works.

4 of the 5 came through, so that means 40 mags for me
Me too! Which one didn't work? Was buds for me.
__________________
Where the people fear the government you have tyranny. Where the government fears the people you have liberty.
Reply With Quote
  #102  
Old 04-01-2019, 6:47 PM
AGGRO's Avatar
AGGRO AGGRO is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: San Diego
Posts: 2,055
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SanDiego619 View Post
I think it's terrible.

He could have at least waited until all of our mags were delivered.
I'm sure no one is bringing them in from out of State cash sales. Or fruit, or illegals or .... insert banned crap here.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #103  
Old 04-01-2019, 6:48 PM
M60A1Rise's Avatar
M60A1Rise M60A1Rise is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 348
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Argument from the commies has been posted

http://michellawyers.com/duncan-v-be...2lBbiIfXr05oSQ
Reply With Quote
  #104  
Old 04-01-2019, 6:49 PM
caliguy93's Avatar
caliguy93 caliguy93 is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: North Koreafornia
Posts: 1,331
iTrader: 18 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by troyPhD View Post
That's what I was wondering (as a non lawyer). California is begging, and has no leverage. There is no requirement for Benitez to act one way or another?
He has to act in good faith. He can't just sit on it for no good reason. if he's busy, needs time to consider and research, sure. But pure avoidance or laziness won't be allowed. There are rules of conduct judges must follow.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #105  
Old 04-01-2019, 6:49 PM
jasonjm jasonjm is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 40
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SanDiego619 View Post
Me too! Which one didn't work? Was buds for me.
exactly lol
Reply With Quote
  #106  
Old 04-01-2019, 6:52 PM
SanDiego619's Avatar
SanDiego619 SanDiego619 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 815
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AGGRO View Post
I'm sure no one is bringing them in from out of State cash sales. Or fruit, or illegals or .... insert banned crap here.
Illegals aren't banned anymore. Illegals are now legal. In fact, we caught 100,000 last month and released them INSIDE our country!!! Unbelievable!! Completely insane!!
__________________
Where the people fear the government you have tyranny. Where the government fears the people you have liberty.
Reply With Quote
  #107  
Old 04-01-2019, 6:53 PM
caliguy93's Avatar
caliguy93 caliguy93 is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: North Koreafornia
Posts: 1,331
iTrader: 18 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SanDiego619 View Post
Ok, so I am trying to find the exact answer here. In section (a) it says "...or receives any large-capacity magazine..."

What EXACTLY does "receive" mean? Bringing a box into your house that was delivered by USPS? Opening the box? Or when USPS puts it on the porch, does that count as receipt?

Thank you.
Borrowed from Cal-Crim 1750 - Jury instructions for Receiving stolen property. It would not be a stretch to borrow the same definition for other Penal Codes.

Quote:
[To receive property means to take possession and control of it. Merepresence near or access to the property is not enough.] [Two or more people can possess the property at the same time.] [A person does not have to actually hold or touch something to possess it. It is enough if the person has [control over it] [or] [the right to control it], either personally or through another person.]
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #108  
Old 04-01-2019, 6:55 PM
SanDiego619's Avatar
SanDiego619 SanDiego619 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 815
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by caliguy93 View Post
Borrowed from Cal-Crim 1750 - Jury instructions for Receiving stolen property. It would not be a stretch to borrow the same definition for other Penal Codes.
Perfect.

Since the packages have been shipped, we currently have the right to control over them, so we have already received them.

Also, I posted a bit ago, I found another definition saying if something needs to be shipped, "delivery" is when the seller gives the package to the carrier.
__________________
Where the people fear the government you have tyranny. Where the government fears the people you have liberty.
Reply With Quote
  #109  
Old 04-01-2019, 6:57 PM
erik_26's Avatar
erik_26 erik_26 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 3,146
iTrader: 18 / 100%
Default

A law is only just if people actually obey it.

If everyone gave and gigantic eff you to the state and decided for themselves what is constitutional and not, the state would be powerless.
__________________
1/15/2019 - Started my California Exit Strategy. Actively applying for jobs in states I would prefer to live in.

While I am in the infancy stages of my quest, it actually felt really good to finally start taking action.
Reply With Quote
  #110  
Old 04-01-2019, 6:58 PM
Hairball's Avatar
Hairball Hairball is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: SoCal or Wyoming
Posts: 1,116
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SmallShark View Post
BTW, why on the first page. the filing date is 2017?
That is when it was filed. Only took 2 years to get through the system to this point...and it's not done yet.
Reply With Quote
  #111  
Old 04-01-2019, 7:00 PM
Discogodfather's Avatar
Discogodfather Discogodfather is offline
Low-Functioning Genius
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 5,489
iTrader: 3 / 80%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by erik_26 View Post
A law is only just if people actually obey it.

If everyone gave and gigantic eff you to the state and decided for themselves what is constitutional and not, the state would be powerless.
Not really. The State has the power to enforce the law, what you are referring to is their ability to enforce the law. Don't confuse the State having little ability to enforce something with it not having the power to do so. They can randomly enforce it to their ability, in a completely unfair way, and comprehensively get away with it.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by doggie View Post
Someone must put an end to this endless bickering by posting the unadulterated indisputable facts and truth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PMACA_MFG View Post
Not checkers, not chess, its Jenga.
"The California matrix of gun control laws is among the harshest in the nation and are filled with criminal law traps for people of common intelligence who desire to obey the law." - U.S. District Judge Roger T. Benitez

Reply With Quote
  #112  
Old 04-01-2019, 7:00 PM
caliguy93's Avatar
caliguy93 caliguy93 is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: North Koreafornia
Posts: 1,331
iTrader: 18 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SanDiego619 View Post
Perfect.

Since the packages have been shipped, we currently have the right to control over them, so we have already received them.

Also, I posted a bit ago, I found another definition saying if something needs to be shipped, "delivery" is when the seller gives the package to the carrier.
Be careful,

What you are saying may be true for Freight on Board (FOB) but that may not ring true for all other shipments. Notice the Jury Instructions say Possession and Control. You do not have possession of the item, and it's a stretch to say you have control until it is physically at your doorstep.

Currently the Shipping company has both possession and control over the physical box. You and the sender may share control over how the package is handled within transit but you certainly don't have possession of it in any sense. Once the package is at your door step, things tend to grey a bit whether you have possession or not. I think for the sake of argument, you still have control of it if you decide to leave it on your doorstep, until someone steals it that is. Then you no longer have either.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #113  
Old 04-01-2019, 7:01 PM
curtisfong's Avatar
curtisfong curtisfong is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 6,062
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SanDiego619 View Post
Perfect.

Since the packages have been shipped, we currently have the right to control over them, so we have already received them.

Also, I posted a bit ago, I found another definition saying if something needs to be shipped, "delivery" is when the seller gives the package to the carrier.
The law rarely works in your favor that way.

Prosecution will claim whatever is most convenient. There is plenty of precedent to argue anything they want. Precedent is infinitely flexible and anything can be bent to whatever is required.

If they need "receiving" to mean "the moment you made the order" they'll find precedent for that. If they need it to mean "the moment it was shipped" they will find precedent for that. If they need it to mean "the moment the shipper dropped it off at your front door", they will find precedent for that. If they need it to mean "the moment you picked up the package from the front porch" they'll find precedent for that.

For receiving stolen property, they want it to mean as soon as possible (shipped? ordered? the moment you decided to orderer it?) For the purposes of this particular odd ball case, they'll want it to mean as late as possible (the moment you opened the box and realized it was BABY KILLER ASSAULT MASSIVE DESTRUCTO HOLLOW POINT ARMOR PIERCING TEFLON COATED MILITARY STYLE MAGAZINES).

Your defense lawyer will try the opposite.

The judge is free to choose whatever fits his political bias to come to the conclusion he wanted to before the case even went to trial. Since this is a firearms case, the case would depend entirely on which party appointed your judge.

That is how the legal system works.
__________________
The Rifle on the Wall

"“[S]cientific proof” of both gun-rights and gun-control theories “is very hard to get”; therefore, requiring “some substantial scientific proof to show that a [firearm] law will indeed substantially reduce crime and injury” is tantamount to applying strict scrutiny to, and almost certainly will lead to invalidation of, the law." - Kamela Harris

Lawyers and their Stockholm Syndrome

Last edited by curtisfong; 04-01-2019 at 7:04 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #114  
Old 04-01-2019, 7:03 PM
DDRH's Avatar
DDRH DDRH is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor - Lifetime
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,443
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mjdlc805 View Post
Can we stop calling them "large capacity Magazines (LCMS)?" I know it is a legal term but you are playing right into their ideology. And Im not even talking about the 30 rounders. They are in essence "standard capacity magazines" and should be called as such. My Spingfields came standard with 16 rounders and 13 rounders, my Beretta came standard with 15 rounders, my Glocks came standard with 15 rounders and 12 rounders and my shield, well that's another story.
Quote:
Originally Posted by curtisfong View Post
I agree. If you must use the term LCM[sic], append [sic], so it is clear you are not doing it willingly.

Same with Assault Weapon[sic].
Agreed. As in I purchased a bunch of standard cap drums
Reply With Quote
  #115  
Old 04-01-2019, 7:05 PM
Walther White Walther White is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 69
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Just so everybody knows, Becerra went in on a State Holiday - Cesar Chavez Day, to craft this work of evil. Yet another reason these lefties are full of s#!t when they say they are for the common man.
Reply With Quote
  #116  
Old 04-01-2019, 7:05 PM
SanDiego619's Avatar
SanDiego619 SanDiego619 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 815
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by caliguy93 View Post
Be careful,

What you are saying may be true for Freight on Board (FOB) but that may not ring true for all other shipments. Notice the Jury Instructions say Possession and Control. You do not have possession of the item, and it's a stretch to say you have control until it is physically at your doorstep.

Currently the Shipping company has both possession and control over the physical box. You and the sender may share control over how the package is handled within transit but you certainly don't have possession of it in any sense. Once the package is at your door step, things tend to grey a bit whether you have possession or not. I think for the sake of argument, you still have control of it if you decide to leave it on your doorstep, until someone steals it that is. Then you no longer have either.
BUT!!

It says... It is enough if the person has [control over it] [or] [the right to control it]

So even if someone steals my package, or it is in the mail, I still have the right to control it, since it is mine.
__________________
Where the people fear the government you have tyranny. Where the government fears the people you have liberty.
Reply With Quote
  #117  
Old 04-01-2019, 7:06 PM
SanDiego619's Avatar
SanDiego619 SanDiego619 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 815
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by curtisfong View Post
The law rarely works in your favor that way.

Prosecution will claim whatever is most convenient. There is plenty of precedent to argue anything they want. Precedent is infinitely flexible and anything can be bent to whatever is required.

If they need "receiving" to mean "the moment you made the order" they'll find precedent for that. If they need it to mean "the moment it was shipped" they will find precedent for that. If they need it to mean "the moment the shipper dropped it off at your front door", they will find precedent for that. If they need it to mean "the moment you picked up the package from the front porch" they'll find precedent for that.

For receiving stolen property, they want it to mean as soon as possible (shipped? ordered? the moment you decided to orderer it?) For the purposes of this particular odd ball case, they'll want it to mean as late as possible (the moment you opened the box and realized it was BABY KILLER ASSAULT MASSIVE DESTRUCTO HOLLOW POINT ARMOR PIERCING TEFLON COATED MILITARY STYLE MAGAZINES).

Your defense lawyer will try the opposite.

The judge is free to choose whatever fits his political bias to come to the conclusion he wanted to before the case even went to trial. Since this is a firearms case, the case would depend entirely on which party appointed your judge.

That is how the legal system works.
Yeah, so I guess we will just get our packages and see what comes down the road later. We did purchase them legally, that is crystal clear.
__________________
Where the people fear the government you have tyranny. Where the government fears the people you have liberty.
Reply With Quote
  #118  
Old 04-01-2019, 7:06 PM
erik_26's Avatar
erik_26 erik_26 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 3,146
iTrader: 18 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Discogodfather View Post
Not really. The State has the power to enforce the law, what you are referring to is their ability to enforce the law. Don't confuse the State having little ability to enforce something with it not having the power to do so. They can randomly enforce it to their ability, in a completely unfair way, and comprehensively get away with it.
Again, only if you let them. You are born free with unequivocal rights. Ultimately you may have to decide between fighting, sacrificing it all or complying. The choice is very much yours and any loss of freedoms is because you allow it.
__________________
1/15/2019 - Started my California Exit Strategy. Actively applying for jobs in states I would prefer to live in.

While I am in the infancy stages of my quest, it actually felt really good to finally start taking action.
Reply With Quote
  #119  
Old 04-01-2019, 7:07 PM
Unbekannt Unbekannt is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 355
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Hey folks, this judge rendered a "summary judgment" against Becerra. This means it did not even go to trial. Why the hell would he then put a stay on something this cut and dry? Prediction: Becerra fails.
Reply With Quote
  #120  
Old 04-01-2019, 7:09 PM
SanDiego619's Avatar
SanDiego619 SanDiego619 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 815
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by erik_26 View Post
Again, only if you let them. You are born free with unequivocal rights. Ultimately you may have to decide between fighting, sacrificing it all or complying. The choice is very much yours and any loss of freedoms is because you allow it.
Everyone has a choice to make.

"Do I want to go to prison or be executed, or should I comply?"

Most people with families and lives will choose compliance. It is how the government controls us. We are fat, happy, and thus, docile.
__________________
Where the people fear the government you have tyranny. Where the government fears the people you have liberty.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 6:03 PM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2018, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
Calguns.net and The Calguns Foundation have no affiliation and are in no way related to each other.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.