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 > 2nd Amend. Litigation Updates & Legal Discussion
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

2nd Amend. Litigation Updates & Legal Discussion Discuss California 2A related litigation and legal topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #281  
Old 09-20-2019, 2:52 PM
Dirtlaw Dirtlaw is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: OC
Posts: 637
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

I'm just making sure I'm on the list to receive updates on this important topic. Sorry I'm adding junk to the thread, but this seemed like the best way to accomplish the goal. My understanding is that you need to make a post in order to subscribe to the thread. Please remove while keeping me on the list, if that is possible.
Reply With Quote
  #282  
Old 09-20-2019, 3:17 PM
Friesland's Avatar
Friesland Friesland is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 776
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

see "Thread Tools" top right, select subscribe
__________________
"It does not take a majority to prevail... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men."-
Samuel Adams
Reply With Quote
  #283  
Old 09-20-2019, 5:49 PM
Metal God's Avatar
Metal God Metal God is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,580
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Well the email with the transcript did not come this week . Sorry guys for getting your hopes up .
__________________
Tolerate
allow the existence, occurrence, or practice of (something that one does not necessarily like or agree with) without interference.

Anyone else find it sad that those who preach tolerance CAN'T allow the existence, occurrence, or practice of (something that they do not necessarily like or agree with) without interference.

If you have the time check this out https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=04wyGK6k6HE or a picture of Mohamed https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1VwpwP_fIqY
Reply With Quote
  #284  
Old 09-20-2019, 6:40 PM
Rakso's Avatar
Rakso Rakso is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 285
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Reply With Quote
  #285  
Old 09-21-2019, 3:50 AM
Dirtlaw Dirtlaw is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: OC
Posts: 637
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default THANK YOU

Quote:
Originally Posted by Friesland View Post
see "Thread Tools" top right, select subscribe

Thank you Friesland! Much appreciated. I am eager for the ruling on the injunction but my life is complicated now and sometimes I don't have much time to search through the board for information.
Reply With Quote
  #286  
Old 09-25-2019, 2:44 PM
FirearmFino FirearmFino is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 131
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

NOTICE of Hearing: Telephonic Status Conference set for 10/1/2019 01:00 PM in Courtroom 5A before Judge Roger T. Benitez.

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket...ode-v-becerra/
Reply With Quote
  #287  
Old 09-25-2019, 3:01 PM
Rakso's Avatar
Rakso Rakso is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 285
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FirearmFino View Post
NOTICE of Hearing: Telephonic Status Conference set for 10/1/2019 01:00 PM in Courtroom 5A before Judge Roger T. Benitez.

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket...ode-v-becerra/
Reply With Quote
  #288  
Old 09-25-2019, 11:02 PM
Ishooter's Avatar
Ishooter Ishooter is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 588
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Will there be any ruling on that date, or the judge will just hear sides of the case?
I can't wait.
Reply With Quote
  #289  
Old 09-26-2019, 11:01 AM
bubbapug1's Avatar
bubbapug1 bubbapug1 is offline
Ball Pimp 4 Border Collie
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: South South OC
Posts: 7,521
iTrader: 287 / 100%
Default

Is benetiz the same judge who won us freedom week on magazines??

God I hope so.
__________________
I love America for the rights and freedoms we used to have.
Reply With Quote
  #290  
Old 09-26-2019, 11:08 AM
USMCmatt's Avatar
USMCmatt USMCmatt is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Ventura County
Posts: 587
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bubbapug1 View Post
Is benetiz the same judge who won us freedom week on magazines??

God I hope so.
Yes...yes he is...
__________________
Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. John 15:13
______________________________________
—USMC OEF Veteran—
Visit American Warrior Decals for custom vinyl decals!


Million Mag March Commemorative Decal HERE
Reply With Quote
  #291  
Old 09-26-2019, 12:01 PM
bubbapug1's Avatar
bubbapug1 bubbapug1 is offline
Ball Pimp 4 Border Collie
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: South South OC
Posts: 7,521
iTrader: 287 / 100%
Default

Benetiz is going to place an injunction on the Ammo ban. That's my prediction. It's definitely an infringement. I must say it has kept a lot of legal gun owning people away from buying ammo.
__________________
I love America for the rights and freedoms we used to have.
Reply With Quote
  #292  
Old 09-26-2019, 12:19 PM
bruss01's Avatar
bruss01 bruss01 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 4,680
iTrader: 21 / 100%
Default

Though I don't expect the AG to make the same mistake twice, it wouldn't be a bad idea for CRPA to contact some of the major online ammo retailers and alert them to the possibility that a limited window for online ammo sales to CA may open briefly and that they'd be fortunately positioned if they had the inventory to accommodate at least some of that spike in business.
__________________
The one thing worse than defeat is surrender.
Reply With Quote
  #293  
Old 09-26-2019, 1:39 PM
tenemae's Avatar
tenemae tenemae is offline
Code Monkey
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: ҚФꙦꙦѤ ꙆꚈҊԂ ™
Posts: 1,124
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bruss01 View Post
Though I don't expect the AG to make the same mistake twice, it wouldn't be a bad idea for CRPA to contact some of the major online ammo retailers and alert them to the possibility that a limited window for online ammo sales to CA may open briefly and that they'd be fortunately positioned if they had the inventory to accommodate at least some of that spike in business.
I would hope the online retailers would anticipate this given the massive cluster**** freedom week was. It couldn't have been anticipated the first time around, but now it should be on their radar.

Democrats: Hi cap mags are illegal
Judge: Nope
calguns buys ALL the mags

Democrats: Can't sell ammo online
calguns lies in waiting

Last edited by tenemae; 09-26-2019 at 1:41 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #294  
Old 09-26-2019, 2:18 PM
aBrowningfan aBrowningfan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 1,102
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ishooter View Post
Will there be any ruling on that date, or the judge will just hear sides of the case?
I can't wait.
My guess is the hearing is more of a status hearing (telephonic status conference from the notice). As in how is the CA-DoJ progressing on the deliverable they were given?

I don't expect a ruling from the bench, unless CA-DoJ totally screws the pooch and blows off Judge Benitez' earlier order.
Reply With Quote
  #295  
Old 09-26-2019, 2:19 PM
mit31 mit31 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 290
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

I don't think the two are comparable. If (when) there is an injunction on this case, it will be long-term until the circuit court makes a ruling on appeal. Unlike the mag case, where you had some "dangerous" mags suddenly legal after 20 years, this case affects ALL ammo, and the ruling will affect a law that is only what, 6 months old. IMHO, if the ruling states that the checks are too burdensome on the right to purchase, the injunction will be left in place while the case works its way through the courts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tenemae View Post
I would hope the online retailers would anticipate this given the massive cluster**** freedom week was. It couldn't have been anticipated the first time around, but now it should be on their radar.

Democrats: Hi cap mags are illegal
Judge: Nope
calguns buys ALL the mags

Democrats: Can't sell ammo online
calguns lies in waiting

Last edited by mit31; 09-26-2019 at 2:23 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #296  
Old 09-26-2019, 2:29 PM
WWDHD? WWDHD? is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Alameda County
Posts: 1,776
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tenemae View Post
I would hope the online retailers would anticipate this given the massive cluster**** freedom week was. It couldn't have been anticipated the first time around, but now it should be on their radar.

Democrats: Hi cap mags are illegal
Judge: Nope
calguns buys ALL the mags

Democrats: Can't sell ammo online
calguns lies in waiting
Wild speculation here: IF there is some kind of a "Freedom Week" repeat concerning ammo- could there possibly be a problem not with sellers but with shippers (UPS, FedEx) not understanding what is going on legally fast enough before another stay is issued by a higher court & refusing to ship into CA? If anything happens at all like last time it might be a bigger deal for local/gun shows & face-to-face sales without the infringement of the state BG check & registration. At least at first. Time will tell.
__________________
NRA & CRPA member
semi-docile tax payer
amateur survivalist

Nolite te bastardes carborundorum!
Reply With Quote
  #297  
Old 09-26-2019, 2:37 PM
bubbapug1's Avatar
bubbapug1 bubbapug1 is offline
Ball Pimp 4 Border Collie
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: South South OC
Posts: 7,521
iTrader: 287 / 100%
Default

The carrier had no liability. He had no clue what's in the box.

Do they pop FedEx for shipping in cocaine?? Or yellow freight??

No.

I don't need any Ammo but I'd still like this over turned. It's a bad precedent.

What's next! Fentynal?
__________________
I love America for the rights and freedoms we used to have.
Reply With Quote
  #298  
Old 09-26-2019, 2:38 PM
aBrowningfan aBrowningfan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 1,102
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mit31 View Post
I don't think the two are comparable. If (when) there is an injunction on this case, it will be long-term until the circuit court makes a ruling on appeal. Unlike the mag case, where you had some "dangerous" mags suddenly legal after 20 years, this case affects ALL ammo, and the ruling will affect a law that is only what, 6 months old. IMHO, if the ruling states that the checks are too burdensome on the right to purchase, the injunction will be left in place while the case works its way through the courts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by WWDHD? View Post
Wild speculation here: IF there is some kind of a "Freedom Week" repeat concerning ammo- could there possibly be a problem not with sellers but with shippers (UPS, FedEx) not understanding what is going on legally fast enough before another stay is issued by a higher court & refusing to ship into CA? If anything happens at all like last time it might be a bigger deal for local/gun shows & face-to-face sales without the infringement of the state BG check & registration. At least at first. Time will tell.
Anything is possible. However, this time around, the most likely outcome from an injunction would be the suspension of the requirement for face-to-face ammunition sales and the ban on Internet sales of ammunition. UPS and a FedEx are not really parties to the litigation, as they are acting as delivery agents for the out of state sellers. Also, remember how the PI in the magazine case played out - PI enjoined enforcement of the requirement to dispossess lawfully acquired magazines with a capacity of > 10+ rounds, which was upheld by the CA9. If a similar PI issues, there won't be a freedom week for ammunition sales, as the ban on Internet and face-to-face ammunition sales will be in place for the duration of the DC litigation.

Net-net, if a PI issues that suspends the face-to-face requirement and ban on Internet ammunition sales, there will be plenty of time for ammunition vendors to ramp up (they probably already have sufficient stock on hand).
Reply With Quote
  #299  
Old 09-26-2019, 2:59 PM
WWDHD? WWDHD? is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Alameda County
Posts: 1,776
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bubbapug1 View Post
The carrier had no liability. He had no clue what's in the box.

Do they pop FedEx for shipping in cocaine?? Or yellow freight??

No.

I don't need any Ammo but I'd still like this over turned. It's a bad precedent.

What's next! Fentynal?
Of course the carrier knows whats in the box if there's ammo involves. all kinds of haz mat markings & "small arms cartridges" stickers on the boxes anytime I legally bought ammo online before the July 1st ban.
Magazines were different in that they are just boxes with springs inside them so the carriers were not so concerned with what was inside the package they were delivering.
__________________
NRA & CRPA member
semi-docile tax payer
amateur survivalist

Nolite te bastardes carborundorum!
Reply With Quote
  #300  
Old 09-26-2019, 5:34 PM
Dvrjon Dvrjon is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 7,134
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WWDHD? View Post
Of course the carrier knows whats in the box if there's ammo involves. all kinds of haz mat markings & "small arms cartridges" stickers on the boxes anytime I legally bought ammo online before the July 1st ban.
Magazines were different in that they are just boxes with springs inside them so the carriers were not so concerned with what was inside the package they were delivering.
I’ve never had a delivery with an open label of “small arms cartridges”. They’ve been double boxed with a generic cover and the warning label on the package was simply “ORM-D” (Other Regulated Materials for Domestic transport only.)

Packages marked ORM-D contain hazardous material in a limited quantity that presents a limited hazard during transportation, due to its form, quantity, and packaging.

That’s used for everything from small arms munitions to perfume and aerosol cans.

The transporter doesn't know what’s in the box...could be primers, powder, perfume or paint....or ammo.
__________________
"People say nothing is impossible, but I do nothing every day.”
"Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently-talented fool."
"The things that come to those who wait may well be the things left by those who got there first."
Reply With Quote
  #301  
Old 09-27-2019, 3:06 AM
bubbapug1's Avatar
bubbapug1 bubbapug1 is offline
Ball Pimp 4 Border Collie
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: South South OC
Posts: 7,521
iTrader: 287 / 100%
Default

I've never received a package indicating it's Ammo either. Just the warning label orm or whatever it says.

Does the Ammo bill unduly burden an Ammo buyer? Not if you have an extra 30 minutes to kill in a Walmart. It's like buying sudafed. But different.
__________________
I love America for the rights and freedoms we used to have.
Reply With Quote
  #302  
Old 09-27-2019, 7:55 AM
sfpcservice's Avatar
sfpcservice sfpcservice is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Suisun City
Posts: 1,710
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bubbapug1 View Post
I've never received a package indicating it's Ammo either. Just the warning label orm or whatever it says.

Does the Ammo bill unduly burden an Ammo buyer? Not if you have an extra 30 minutes to kill in a Walmart. It's like buying sudafed. But different.
Sudafed isn't an enumerated right.
__________________
http://theresedoksheim.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/gridlock.jpg

Voting "Yes" on a California bond measure is like giving a degenerate gambler more money because he says he has the game figured out....

John 14:6
Reply With Quote
  #303  
Old 09-27-2019, 8:06 AM
taperxz taperxz is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 17,071
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Look for a partial injunction from the judge.

Background checks halted due to the DOJ cluster luck of a system

Which is, split level checks on ammo, FLA BS that ATF has no problem with and possibly the actual registry of ammo.

Online sales may not be taken off since the courts have ruled on other commerce items that a state may restrict online sales like alcohol.
Reply With Quote
  #304  
Old 09-27-2019, 8:16 AM
Dvrjon Dvrjon is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 7,134
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bubbapug1 View Post
Does the Ammo bill law unduly burden an Ammo buyer?
FIFY

Quote:
Originally Posted by bubbapug1 View Post
Not if you have an extra 30 minutes to kill in a Walmart. It's like buying sudafed. But different.
Yup, different...the Walmarts around me still sell Sudafed....
__________________
"People say nothing is impossible, but I do nothing every day.”
"Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently-talented fool."
"The things that come to those who wait may well be the things left by those who got there first."
Reply With Quote
  #305  
Old 09-27-2019, 10:00 AM
gobler's Avatar
gobler gobler is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: SGV near Azusa
Posts: 2,894
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bubbapug1 View Post
I've never received a package indicating it's Ammo either. Just the warning label orm or whatever it says.

Does the Ammo bill unduly burden an Ammo buyer? Not if you have an extra 30 minutes to kill in a Walmart. It's like buying sudafed. But different.
Tell that to those who live over an hour from a walmart or any vender who sells ammo. Thats why Needals Ca unanimously adopted a second amendment sanctuary City. They live less the 10 miles from stores in Az but are prohibited from buying. They live 100 miles from the nearest Ca store. That's infringement.
__________________
Quote:
200 bullets at a time......
http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2003-5/198981/life01.jpg

Subscribe to my YouTube channel ---->http://www.youtube.com/user/2A4USA
Reply With Quote
  #306  
Old 09-27-2019, 10:50 AM
B.J.F.'s Avatar
B.J.F. B.J.F. is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Bullhead City, AZ
Posts: 572
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gobler View Post
Tell that to those who live over an hour from a walmart or any vender who sells ammo. Thats why Needals Ca unanimously adopted a second amendment sanctuary City. They live less the 10 miles from stores in Az but are prohibited from buying. They live 100 miles from the nearest Ca store. That's infringement.
Currently people of Needles have to drive to Barstow or Victorville over 2 hours away to legally buy ammo.

At the Needles city hall meeting, most admitted they just go to AZ, buy and bring back needed ammo in violation to the states law because the law is unjust and burdensome to them and their location.

As one person said it, “who has 5 hours in their day to spend just to obtain ammo”
__________________
Newly Minted Prase of 2019 “Don’t Smollett Me Bro”
Reply With Quote
  #307  
Old 09-27-2019, 11:50 AM
aBrowningfan aBrowningfan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 1,102
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by taperxz View Post
Look for a partial injunction from the judge.

Background checks halted due to the DOJ cluster luck of a system

Which is, split level checks on ammo, FLA BS that ATF has no problem with and possibly the actual registry of ammo.

Online sales may not be taken off since the courts have ruled on other commerce items that a state may restrict online sales like alcohol.
Do you think the ban on importation (CA residents buying ammunition out-of-state and bringing their purchase back with them on return) will remain? If so, I am curious as to your reason(s) why.
Reply With Quote
  #308  
Old 09-27-2019, 2:41 PM
taperxz taperxz is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 17,071
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aBrowningfan View Post
Do you think the ban on importation (CA residents buying ammunition out-of-state and bringing their purchase back with them on return) will remain? If so, I am curious as to your reason(s) why.
I would think the judge would over turn that too. Its legal commerce and purchased legally out of state.
Reply With Quote
  #309  
Old 09-27-2019, 3:52 PM
tehDiceman tehDiceman is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 73
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Be cautious though, there was much discussion that the judge didn't seem too concerned about the background check portion, just the tons of denials portion. That would indicate import/online sales may not come back unless the state fumbles their handling and he rules to punish their contempt.

I'm hopeful that we'll get online sales and import back, too much cheap ammo out there that we aren't able to buy and that stinks for those of us with a budget.
Reply With Quote
  #310  
Old 09-27-2019, 11:08 PM
paddyraid's Avatar
paddyraid paddyraid is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 436
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tehDiceman View Post
Be cautious though, there was much discussion that the judge didn't seem too concerned about the background check portion, just the tons of denials portion. That would indicate import/online sales may not come back unless the state fumbles their handling and he rules to punish their contempt.

I'm hopeful that we'll get online sales and import back, too much cheap ammo out there that we aren't able to buy and that stinks for those of us with a budget.
you would be buying it if you had gotten your 03FFL like many of us did. it's not too late. best thing I ever did!
Reply With Quote
  #311  
Old 09-28-2019, 5:34 AM
tehDiceman tehDiceman is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 73
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by paddyraid View Post
you would be buying it if you had gotten your 03FFL like many of us did. it's not too late. best thing I ever did!
Only until daddy state says you can't anymore because "safety" or "children". I also see the 03ffl as a just another tax, much like the background check garbage. I'm done willingly giving this state extra money for no reason. The rest of the country doesn't need a friggin FFL to buy ammo online and to hand over more of your info, money, and have additional requirements placed on your firearm ownership just to buy ammo online is not my idea of a good time. (bound book requirements, record keeping, etc.)

I just want to be like an average Joe in a free state and that shouldn't be too much to ask, ya know, to have equality? (Does this become our new standing ground? We want equality and inclusivity with the rest of the gun community? A liberal mind has already exploded over this thought. Lolol)

Think about it though, it is absurd that you need a Federal License to buy ammo like the rest of the country? Sounds a lot like the federal license to own guns that some of the Dem hopefuls are spouting about.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

Last edited by tehDiceman; 09-28-2019 at 5:38 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #312  
Old 09-28-2019, 9:39 AM
taperxz taperxz is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 17,071
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tehDiceman View Post
Be cautious though, there was much discussion that the judge didn't seem too concerned about the background check portion, just the tons of denials portion. That would indicate import/online sales may not come back unless the state fumbles their handling and he rules to punish their contempt.

I'm hopeful that we'll get online sales and import back, too much cheap ammo out there that we aren't able to buy and that stinks for those of us with a budget.
If the judge doesn't think the background check is an infringement, how do you think he would allow for internet sales to your door too?
Reply With Quote
  #313  
Old 09-28-2019, 11:35 AM
donw's Avatar
donw donw is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: between temecula and palm springs
Posts: 1,711
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Cool

Quote:
Originally Posted by aBrowningfan View Post
Um... isn't the case in U.S. District Court (out of state litigants)?

Edit: Separately, I think the non-2A causes of action improve the chances for a favorable outcome for Internet ammunition purchasers. It would be one thing if the case was about a pure 2A matter. Internet ammunition purchases (especially with a sympathetic litigant such as Kim Rhode) is not the same as trying to reverse an AW ban. Rhode can make a bread-and-butter argument that the ban negatively impacts her ability to practice and thus, her ability compete at the level she competes at.

Call me an optimist, but I think the chances of a favorable outcome with this case are north of 50%.
I agree...this "Law" does interfere with the 2A. can a firearm be considered as being a firearm with no ammo to utilize in it?
__________________
NRA life member, US Army Veteran

i am a legend in my own mind...

we are told not to judge muslims by what a few do...yet, the NRA membership and firearms owners are ALL considered as radical...

"The second amendment ain't about your deer rifle..."
Reply With Quote
  #314  
Old 09-28-2019, 1:04 PM
librarian72 librarian72 is online now
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 68
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

I wouldn't be surprised if it was anything but a favorable outcome, at least in the near term. Given that the judge has already said during the mag ban that laws that are not tailored at all fail any level of enhanced scrutiny. How could this be any different? It seems likely to play out like the mag case. Enjoined, followed by a motion to remove it while appeals play out.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Librarian View Post
US Circuit Courts of Appeal have no deadlines; they work on what they want, when they want. The 9th also seems sometimes to Make Stuff Up in their opinions.
Reply With Quote
  #315  
Old 09-28-2019, 3:33 PM
Dvrjon Dvrjon is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 7,134
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tehDiceman View Post
.... have additional requirements placed on your firearm ownership just to buy ammo online is not my idea of a good time. (bound book requirements, record keeping, etc.)

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
Not to distract from the discussion, but this indicates a lack of knowledge of the process and responsibilities.
__________________
"People say nothing is impossible, but I do nothing every day.”
"Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently-talented fool."
"The things that come to those who wait may well be the things left by those who got there first."
Reply With Quote
  #316  
Old 09-29-2019, 7:10 PM
cockedandglocked's Avatar
cockedandglocked cockedandglocked is offline
Vendor/Retailer
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Near Excremento
Posts: 15,697
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by paddyraid View Post
you would be buying it if you had gotten your 03FFL like many of us did. it's not too late. best thing I ever did!
Because that "loophole" will definitely be around forever.
Reply With Quote
  #317  
Old 09-29-2019, 7:40 PM
Dvrjon Dvrjon is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 7,134
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cockedandglocked View Post
Because that "loophole" will definitely be around forever.
1. It isn't a "loophole"; it's a black-letter law.

2. Every law can be changed, but given the reasoning behind the ammo laws, it will be difficult to make the case that folks with federal and state credentials/clearance, are a threat for supplying gangsters with ammo.
__________________
"People say nothing is impossible, but I do nothing every day.”
"Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently-talented fool."
"The things that come to those who wait may well be the things left by those who got there first."
Reply With Quote
  #318  
Old 09-30-2019, 8:31 AM
deckhandmike's Avatar
deckhandmike deckhandmike is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Morro Bay
Posts: 5,484
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ishooter View Post
Will there be any ruling on that date, or the judge will just hear sides of the case?
I can't wait.
Anyone else have an idea on this?
Reply With Quote
  #320  
Old 09-30-2019, 7:40 PM
ronlglock's Avatar
ronlglock ronlglock is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,231
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Default Rhode v. Becerra (Challenge to CA Ammo Sales) - motion for injunction 7-22-19

So 42 prohibited persons were stopped from buying ammunition in July and August. Meanwhile, 30,000 presumably legal purchasers also were blocked.

Well, I guess it’s for the children.

__________________

NRA Patron, CRPA Life, SAF Life, GSSF Life, NRA RSO and pistol instructor, ILEETA instructor. Stop me before I join something else!

Last edited by ronlglock; 09-30-2019 at 7:43 PM..
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 5:54 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.