• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Ninth Circuit strikes California’s restrictive rule against licensed carry of [W:93]

Re: Ninth Circuit strikes California’s restrictive rule against licensed carry of han

Lutherf said:
Ninth Circuit strikes California’s restrictive rule against licensed carry of handguns

From the decision - http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2014/02/12/1056971.pdf

and

and


It's a lengthy decision (77 pages not counting the dissent) and covers a ton of history which I haven't gotten into yet but at first blush this seems like a great win for CA and has the potential to yank the rug out from under the remaining "may issue" states.

I suspect that this decision will be appealed but if SCOTUS decides to hear the case and uphold it we may find that it is every bit the landmark decision that Heller was.
Click to expand...
Any update?
 
Re: Ninth Circuit strikes California’s restrictive rule against licensed carry of han

Jerry said:
Any update?
Click to expand...

Appeals Court ruling shall stand unless it goes to the Supreme Court.
 
Re: Ninth Circuit strikes California’s restrictive rule against licensed carry of han

Sietske22 said:
Appeals Court ruling shall stand unless it goes to the Supreme Court.
Click to expand...
When will that translate into new laws?
 
Re: Ninth Circuit strikes California’s restrictive rule against licensed carry of han

Anything new?

Is this going to be appealed to the Supremes?
 
Re: Ninth Circuit strikes California’s restrictive rule against licensed carry of han

Sietske22 said:
It was announced today that the full 9th Circuit court will not be reviewing this case, and it will stand as decided.

California is now officially Shall-Issue CCW.

That's unless the AG calls for a stay, so that he can appeal to the Supreme Court.
Click to expand...

He should be tried for treason
 
Re: Ninth Circuit strikes California’s restrictive rule against licensed carry of han

TurtleDude said:
Mata Hari was pretty much a look too. Harris might be the best looking AG-she is no where near the best looking attorney in the USA. a graduate of U Cincinnati Law school for example was a Miss America top ten finisher (Pam Rigas).
Click to expand...

now Pam Bondi of Florida? I'm taking a guess I didn't google it. but I remember people saying Pam Bondi looked better when the Obama thing happened :D

Never mind, just googled it, nope wrong guess
 
Re: Ninth Circuit strikes California’s restrictive rule against licensed carry of han

AmericanSpartan said:
**** a trial...
Click to expand...

Go straight to the hanging?

That's not very American. More like ISIS rules.
 
Re: Ninth Circuit strikes California’s restrictive rule against licensed carry of han

Sietske22 said:
Go straight to the hanging?

That's not very American. More like ISIS rules.
Click to expand...

Like violating people's rights.
 
Re: Ninth Circuit strikes California’s restrictive rule against licensed carry of han

Truth be told, not all of California is strict when it comes to issuance. It's up to the sheriff of the county you reside. I'm in San bernardino county and it is shall issue without actually calling it that. Several of our counties are. It's the costal liberal counties where you are boned. There are a few exceptions though.

Still great news not only to us here in CA but also states that fall under the 9th. Cough cough Hawaii cough.
 
Re: Ninth Circuit strikes California’s restrictive rule against licensed carry of han

Sietske22 said:
Go straight to the hanging?

That's not very American. More like ISIS rules.
Click to expand...

When you commit treason, betray your people, you lose your rights.
 
Re: Ninth Circuit strikes California’s restrictive rule against licensed carry of han

AmericanSpartan said:
When you commit treason, betray your people, you lose your rights.
Click to expand...

A public servant violating the Constitution ought to be considered similarly to a traitor, in terms of the severity of the offense and of the appropriate penalty.
 
Re: Ninth Circuit strikes California’s restrictive rule against licensed carry of han

AmericanSpartan said:
When you commit treason, betray your people, you lose your rights.
Click to expand...

The punishment for treason is the death penalty. All the more reason to make sure the accused is actually guilty of the crime, and his or her 4th, 5th, and 6th Amendment rights are respected.

The day we throw out these protections and merely rely on a lynch mob mentality is when Fascism has taken over.
 
Re: Ninth Circuit strikes California’s restrictive rule against licensed carry of han

Sietske22 said:
The punishment for treason is the death penalty. All the more reason to make sure the accused is actually guilty of the crime, and his or her 4th, 5th, and 6th Amendment rights are respected.

The day we throw out these protections and merely rely on a lynch mob mentality is when Fascism has taken over.
Click to expand...

The problem with liberalism end game is that the government ends up being the lynch mob.
 
Re: Ninth Circuit strikes California’s restrictive rule against licensed carry of han

Moderator's Warning:
Folks, let's discuss this topic without caling for the death of public officials. Thanks
 
Re: Ninth Circuit strikes California’s restrictive rule against licensed carry of [W:

Case went before 11 judges of the Ninth Circuit Court in June.

Any idea when the case may be decided?
 
Re: Ninth Circuit strikes California’s restrictive rule against licensed carry of han

Bootlace said:
Truth be told, not all of California is strict when it comes to issuance. It's up to the sheriff of the county you reside. I'm in San bernardino county and it is shall issue without actually calling it that. Several of our counties are. It's the costal liberal counties where you are boned. There are a few exceptions though.

Still great news not only to us here in CA but also states that fall under the 9th. Cough cough Hawaii cough.
Click to expand...

I cannot understand why those laws were passed in the first instance. Do California firearm owners not give a damn about their right or are they waiting for useless and apathetic firearm organisations to not do a thing for them. For too many years have firearm organisations taken no part in this fight. Instead they pretend it has nothing to with them as long as some can still get guns somehow.

When people tell me the NRA can win I simply point to California and say tell me again when they take back California which they gave away. So far the NRA is pretending California and other lost states do not exist, Not worth the trouble or effort.
 
Re: Ninth Circuit strikes California’s restrictive rule against licensed carry of [W:

Crimefree said:
I cannot understand why those laws were passed in the first instance. Do California firearm owners not give a damn about their right or are they waiting for useless and apathetic firearm organisations to not do a thing for them. For too many years have firearm organisations taken no part in this fight. Instead they pretend it has nothing to with them as long as some can still get guns somehow.

When people tell me the NRA can win I simply point to California and say tell me again when they take back California which they gave away. So far the NRA is pretending California and other lost states do not exist, Not worth the trouble or effort.
Click to expand...

For the most part california is shall issue and has been since I can remember. Also, for the most part California is a conservative state by area. It is the highly populated costal counties that outnumber the rest of us. For perspective, just the CITY of san Diego is nearing the population of the entire STATE of Idaho, and San diego county has double the population of said state.
The down fall of california began with the great hippie migration of the '60s and 70's.

But to reply to your post, it takes under a year to pass a law, but takes decades to challenge it. And once you have a law challenged, many more have since been passed. It's like swimming up the niagra falls. We have a team of fine lawyers putting up a good fight but are picking our battles carefully. The last thing we want is for a challenge to go the wrong way. It will take some time but the idiots in Sacramento will eventually hang themselves and california will be the cause of another heller type decision. And the NRA is definately funding our fight.
 
Last edited:
Re: Ninth Circuit strikes California’s restrictive rule against licensed carry of [W:

Bootlace said:
For the most part california is shall issue and has been since I can remember. Also, for the most part California is a conservative state by area. It is the highly populated costal counties that outnumber the rest of us. For perspective, just the CITY of san Diego is nearing the population of the entire STATE of Idaho, and San diego county has double the population of said state.
The down fall of california began with the great hippie migration of the '60s and 70's.
Click to expand...

:lol:

Thanks for your honest and refreshing view. This in no way is a reflection on you and really to discuss winning one must be willing to see the reasons of failure and endeavour to improve or rectify that.

The one thing we humans do very well is dream up reasons why we cannot do something. By this reasoning gun control would take one look at other states and go home or simply give up. Resorting to fighting in court only. Both you and I know that will never be the case. So if gun control will not choose that way why do we?

First we have to learn to fight fire with fire or water and not pour petrol on the fire. There is absolutely no way we should be helping gun control either by doing nothing or by doing the wrong thing.

But to reply to your post, it takes under a year to pass a law,
Click to expand...

Sure but we are forgetting to examine ways of preventing that and instead saying we can only challenge such laws after the fact. Laws go through a process and the weak point is that they must be supported by citizens. This means they are subject to public acceptance and support.

Does that not suggest that it is better to prevent than try to cure?

but takes decades to challenge it. And once you have a law challenged, many more have since been passed.
Click to expand...

There is no more risky and expensive way of challenging a law that has only a small chance of success. Basically one is trying to out lawyer government which is simply going to use your money to fight. When it loses there will simply be a change of direction for a period. In the end it is not possible to win this way as more laws are generated than shot down. Funding is not unlimited as in the case of government.

It's like swimming up the niagra falls.
Click to expand...

Absolutely correctly stated and it has only one outcome. Why does nobody see that and figure there must be a better way? If gun control can win by us choosing to be silly and unchanging that is helping gun control by being unwilling to explore other ways.

We have a team of fine lawyers putting up a good fight but are picking our battles carefully. The last thing we want is for a challenge to go the wrong way. It will take some time but the idiots in Sacramento will eventually hang themselves and california will be the cause of another heller type decision.
Click to expand...

Hmm we have just shown that it cannot be won and have forgotten that with a leap of faith. Back track. How is this win possible if one is swimming up Niagara falls?

And the NRA is definately funding our fight.
Click to expand...

Which is to say the most unlikely to succeed and expensive way is being funded.

Is there a better way that has far more chance of success that is not being seen because we prefer not to think? Why does gun control succeed then? Is it because it has not chosen to fight in court and does something else?
 
Last edited:
Re: Ninth Circuit strikes California’s restrictive rule against licensed carry of [W:

Bootlace said:
For the most part california is shall issue and has been since I can remember. Also, for the most part California is a conservative state by area. It is the highly populated costal counties that outnumber the rest of us. For perspective, just the CITY of san Diego is nearing the population of the entire STATE of Idaho, and San diego county has double the population of said state.
The down fall of california began with the great hippie migration of the '60s and 70's.

But to reply to your post, it takes under a year to pass a law, but takes decades to challenge it. And once you have a law challenged, many more have since been passed. It's like swimming up the niagra falls. We have a team of fine lawyers putting up a good fight but are picking our battles carefully. The last thing we want is for a challenge to go the wrong way. It will take some time but the idiots in Sacramento will eventually hang themselves and california will be the cause of another heller type decision. And the NRA is definately funding our fight.
Click to expand...

It all depends on the specific counties and cities.

The dense urban areas like Los Angeles, San Diego, Orange County, San Francisco, Oakland, San Jose, and the counties that include them, are essentially SHALL NOT ISSUE.

The rest of the state including Sacramento is essentially de facto SHALL ISSUE.

Sacramento has a really great sheriff who believes in the U.S. Constitution.

The other sheriffs in those cities aforementioned are Communists. Their police chiefs are Communists too. The most Communist was one in particular named Mcnamara. RIP.

San Jose: Joe McNamara dies; iconic former police chief - San Jose Mercury News
 
Re: Ninth Circuit strikes California’s restrictive rule against licensed carry of [W:

I
Crimefree said:
:lol:

Thanks for your honest and refreshing view. This in no way is a reflection on you and really to discuss winning one must be willing to see the reasons of failure and endeavour to improve or rectify that.

The one thing we humans do very well is dream up reasons why we cannot do something. By this reasoning gun control would take one look at other states and go home or simply give up. Resorting to fighting in court only. Both you and I know that will never be the case. So if gun control will not choose that way why do we?

First we have to learn to fight fire with fire or water and not pour petrol on the fire. There is absolutely no way we should be helping gun control either by doing nothing or by doing the wrong thing.



Sure but we are forgetting to examine ways of preventing that and instead saying we can only challenge such laws after the fact. Laws go through a process and the weak point is that they must be supported by citizens. This means they are subject to public acceptance and support.

Does that not suggest that it is better to prevent than try to cure?



There is no more risky and expensive way of challenging a law that has only a small chance of success. Basically one is trying to out lawyer government which is simply going to use your money to fight. When it loses there will simply be a change of direction for a period. In the end it is not possible to win this way as more laws are generated than shot down. Funding is not unlimited as in the case of government.



Absolutely correctly stated and it has only one outcome. Why does nobody see that and figure there must be a better way? If gun control can win by us choosing to be silly and unchanging that is helping gun control by being unwilling to explore other ways.



Hmm we have just shown that it cannot be won and have forgotten that with a leap of faith. Back track. How is this win possible if one is swimming up Niagara falls?



Which is to say the most unlikely to succeed and expensive way is being funded.

Is there a better way that has far more chance of success that is not being seen because we prefer not to think? Why does gun control succeed then? Is it because it has not chosen to fight in court and does something else?
Click to expand...
Are you speaking of trying to premptively kill a bill by contacting our representatives? If so, we do that but to little success. The gun rights crowd here is just outnumbered.

Our collective voices don't amount to a mutter compared to the roar of the big costal counties. I fear it will get worse before it gets better. But it isn't just gun right that suck here.

I Can't Believe They Let You Do That! - YouTube
 
Bootlace said:
I
Are you speaking of trying to premptively kill a bill by contacting our representatives? If so, we do that but to little success. The gun rights crowd here is just outnumbered.
Click to expand...

Nice guess you are on the right track. Try not to add the pessimism to it. It usually means conventional thinking did not supply the right answers.

Lobbing politicians is a matter of course but realise it is not worth much if to few do it. And as you observed out numbered.
First principle: The only currency of politics is power and that has been demonstrated. Fact is firearm owners have little interest in contacting anyone or doing anything at present. Fix it.

Problem 1 Too few interested people. Solve it. Gun control did and others have.

Firearm organisations have not answered the first question anyone will ask "what's in it for me". I promise firearm owners will take little interest until they do know.

Our collective voices don't amount to a mutter compared to the roar of the big costal counties. I fear it will get worse before it gets better. But it isn't just gun right that suck here.
Click to expand...

The only concern is OUR rights to self-defence, freedom and safety. Do note those words are deliberate. Chance the focus. Nobody gives a rats rear end about gun rights or a "few" individuals.

So the media is biased. That bias is not costing the media one cent and there is no observable gauge that the public are dissatisfied because firearm organisations and owners will tell them it is impossible to do anything about. Self-defeating.

These are all solvable problems none of which are impossible and if done a win is guaranteed as is a loss if nothing is done to counter gun control.. Swimming up Niagara is sure as heck not going to win.

Running on a live version of Linux so cannot see the youtube abobe flash
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom