|
California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism Discuss gun rights activism and 2A related political topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel. |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#401
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#402
|
||||
|
||||
This is how we got here. People don't even know their rights are being taken away.
__________________
|
#403
|
|||
|
|||
After reading every post on every page so far, all I can say is this:
Don't let a good thing go bad by de-railing a process that has been in the works for sometime, due to a lack of patience. My understanding of the situation isn't an instant fix to the potholes that are CA's bs gun laws, but is laying the pavement for the long road towards recognizing the potholes(unconstitutional laws), and fixing them. |
#404
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
They are UNAmerican despots who are opposed to being limited by a written Constitution. |
#405
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
1. Right to defense is MOST ACUTE in the home. It doesn't mean it doesn't exist outside the home, just that it is recognized as most acute. 2. They suggest that some long-standing regulations are valid, but not all of them. But what is considered long-standing? The roster is not long standing, nor is the California hi-cap magazine ban. How about the AW ban here in Cali? Nope, not long-standing. 3. Sensitive places means to me that, since they continually say "IN" sensitive places, things like the 1000 foot zone around schools in California will go down. And again, it is no long-standing, it is barely 10 15 years old. All they did was affirm that this doesn't mean that every gun law is subject to being void, but that doesn't mean that all current gun laws stand. |
#406
|
||||
|
||||
The only way to finish this game is to quit. There is no end. It's a Massively Multiplayer Constitutional Republic, there's no end to the tedious grinding and poorly crafted storylines. Keep doing your dailies and turn-ins and eventually you'll reach the xp cap. Every once in awhile, you might join an epic raid, but those can't happen everyday, even if you have a kick *** guild. Maybe pay to play isn't the best model, but I plan on participating until I get my epic loots.
|
#407
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Orderly:... 2. Not ruinultuous; Well regulated. Time keeping (horology) is one of my hobbies. When horologists see a clock, watch or other time piece that keeps very good time we say it is "well regulated". People who have a double barreled gun will say the gun is "well regulated" if both barrels shoot to the same point of aim. In both of these cases the term "well regulated" means to function corrected or properly adjusted and this is how it should be read when reading the 2nd Amendment. With respect to the militia this means properly equipped, trained and organized. Keep in mind that at that time there were laws that required (almost) everyone (males between 16 and 50 for example) to be members of the militia and to supply the arms necessary to do what a militiaman needed (IE. they had to own a rifle and ammo and other equipment) and to show up for drill. The officers for the militia were to be appointed by a process as set forth by the state and so on. If these conditions were in place the militia was "well regulated" meaning that they had officers, regular drill (training) and each member had the required rifle and ammo. That the militia was functional. Notice that this has almost nothing to do with the regulation of arms other than what arms are required for militiamen. In modern terms this would be like requiring all those who are part of the militia (according to current US code all males between the ages of 18 and 45 who are not part of the military or the National Guard) to own an M16 and have a certain number of magazines and a certain amount of ammo (and other things like perhaps a uniform or a back pack...). Notice how the actual meaning of a "well regulated" militia takes things in the opposite direction from what the gun banners want since it would result in most of the population being armed like a typical US Army infantry member. Thus they try to confuse folks by bringing up the definition of regulated but ignoring the meaning of "well regulated". |
#408
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
It's about focusing resources. Not about throwing as many cases as we can to further our agenda. |
#409
|
||||
|
||||
Very true. If a matter got all the way to the SCOTUS, then it is almost certainly something of high controversy and contention in society at large.
|
#410
|
||||
|
||||
+1.
__________________
|
#412
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
So what is a win is a loss as well. In California - nothing changes. Life on the edge continues. Open Carry will end soon and that is that. Fear and emotions rule over rights and intellect these days. Oh Hum - another day in the factory..... Best of luck to all.
__________________
- Aut Pax Aut Bellum - Volunteer LDW |
#414
|
||||
|
||||
Not to defend anyone or jump on a sinking ship, but tell that to Stephen Reinhardt. Read Silveria v. Lockyer or any of the other of the man's reversed opinions. It seems all he does is write advisory opinions.
__________________
Quote:
|
#415
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
AB962.... good luck, IMO. GCA68 had a registration requirement for ammo, BATFE re-wrote the regs to get rid of it because it was a waste of time and resources. I don't know that the law itself was changed or repealed let alone challenged, however, I also have to think it could well stand scrutiny just as DROS almost certainly can under a compelling interest of the state argument. Unless AB962 is struck (as it rightly should be) under interstate commerce, we may well be stuck with it until the state comes to the same conclusion that BATFE did. Waiting periods... again, I think not a lot of traction there. Yeah it's foolish, however I have a hunch it would be a hard row to hoe to get to "unreasonable restriction". Now if there were some modifications to the waiting period, such as CCW holder exempt or subsequent purchases subject only to NICS (like many other states), then that would be a win to me. The roster... this is right up there with CCW, IMO. The very idea of the roster itself, when combined with the LEO exemption (equal protection argument), is absurd on it's face. The roster falling will open the door to far deeper penetrations of the farce that is much of California's gun law. AWB... getting the ban overturned is, to me, a high priority, but there are potential land mines for us in that issue so I believe it is going to have to wait it's turn farther down the list. I wouldn't count on success and have a feeling that we may never get rid of the BB. But that's just one lay opinion. I am certain the the right people already have the strategy outlined over a period of years. And I trust them to know exactly what they are doing.
__________________
-- Rifle, Pistol, Shotgun Not a lawyer, just a former LEO proud to have served. Quote:
|
#416
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
.. .........STGC(SW) SAF Life Member NRA Benefactor |
#417
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
The 1792 dictionary definition of "regulated" is irrelevant. The Supreme Court, in the HELLER decision gives a lengthy dissertation on what "Well Regulated Militia" meant when written, and means now and going forward. As they are the final arbiters of the LEGAL DEFINITIONS of terms used in the United States Constitution your argument is two years too late.
__________________
Life is too short to drive a Ferrari... |
#419
|
||||
|
||||
Does this bother anyone else?
No mention of this on local news. http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/index But they have plenty of coverage of Kagen.
__________________
|
#421
|
||||
|
||||
Yeah... Reinhardt (nay Ripston) is a real barrel of monkeys... I have issues with him that go well beyond the 2nd Amendment. He took the John Paul Stevens correspondence course on appellate review.
__________________
Life is too short to drive a Ferrari... Last edited by RomanDad; 06-28-2010 at 11:42 AM.. |
#422
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Quote:
|
#423
|
|||
|
|||
Holy crap!
__________________
New and Reloaded Ammunition for sale! |
#424
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
NRA - Life Member Guns don't kill people. People Kill people. |
#429
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
The 10 day wait, and school zones are in my opinion the lowest of priority.
__________________
Owner of Patriot Apparel - Decals, Vintage Signs, Apparel and More! Ebay Store Link Etsy Store Link |
#430
|
||||
|
||||
Woo
__________________
Life is too short to drive a Ferrari... |
#432
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill billy Does this mean that Cruikshank, Miller and Presser are all dead? Miller's not a bad case, when you strip away the extraneous garbage that the anti's hung on it. We're left with, "the Court has no evidence before it that sawed-off shotguns are useful in the militia". That evidence is easy to find. IMHO, Heller and McDonald have not exhausted the meaning of the 2nd Amendment - they just focused on PERSONAL self-defense aspects. ...militia aspects wait for another day... . |
#434
|
||||
|
||||
A wait of ANY time period "might" make sense for 1st time gun buyers, but NOT for anyone who already owns a gun of any kind.
__________________
.. .........STGC(SW) SAF Life Member NRA Benefactor |
#435
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
. |
#436
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
M. Zimmers Born-again Californian (for better or worse) |
#437
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
It is a victory, and I don't want to sound pessimistic, but I almost see what the nay sayers are saying. Part of the problem is, due to the efforts of the CGF, and the powers that be, we already had very good intel about the outcome of the decision. Due to who was writing the majority opinion, we already knew we won; before today, the only thing we did not know is to what degree we won. Because today was not the "pie in the sky" P and I, incorporation, AND strict scrutiny, the only thing we basically did today was win the right to file more lawsuits, pay more money, and waste more time. As a result, all we did was win; none of the major goals were addressed so we only gained an inch so people are frustrated. Had we not been so well informed, we might have taken the news with greater zeal. To those that were not terribly impressed, all I can say is look at any of the other constitutional fights in the past. Emancipation, women's lib, Civil rights, the first amendment.... et cetera... these fights took DECADES. We have gone from "no right to own guns at all" to "right to own guns in the home", a 180 degree turn in less than 4 years. We are WELL ahead of the curve in our fight. People had to die in other causes that were worth fighting; we have come farther without bloodshed. Before the last few years, the SCOTUS had not heard a gun case in 50 years. We are at the beginning of a long fight. All being said, I am very optimistic about the future!
__________________
Quote:
|
#438
|
|||
|
|||
Completely agree. I don't really care if a first time buyer has to wait since I'd never have to wait another day in my life
|
#439
|
||||
|
||||
__________________
.. .........STGC(SW) SAF Life Member NRA Benefactor |
#440
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
The court ruled that the bill of rights does not DIRECTLY apply to the states; were it not for the 14th amendment, states would be free to infringe on all rights because it would only apply to the federal government. The 14th amendment was passed to make some of those provisions bound to the states either through Privileges and Immunities, or by Due Process but only applies to fundamental rights. Guns are a fundamental right, so the Due Process clause of the 14th amendment makes them bound to the states, indirectly.
__________________
Quote:
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|