• 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!

California's "may issue" rule ruled unconstitutional

Is this a good ruling?


  • Total voters
    25

cpgrad08

American
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 19, 2011
Messages
5,681
Reaction score
3,023
Location
WA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
The idea that the state gets to decide who "needs" their rights is even more rediculous than charging rent to keep them.
 
So what do you guys think of the 9th circuit ruling that California must be a shall issue state when in comes to conceal carry permits.

I think it is a very good ruling and gives California's some freedom back to them that the state took away from them.

California ban on concealed weapons overturned by 9th Circuit appeals court

For the time being. My bet is this goes to the SCOTUS and who knows how they will rule. Does the SCOTUS go by original intent or by someone's political agenda.
 
So what do you guys think of the 9th circuit ruling that California must be a shall issue state when in comes to conceal carry permits.

I think it is a very good ruling and gives California's some freedom back to them that the state took away from them.

California ban on concealed weapons overturned by 9th Circuit appeals court



It's a bit of an odd decision for the 9th 'Circus' IMO... they've usually been classified as rather far left-leaning, as well as the most-reversed court in America.

One wonders if their purpose is to force the Supremes to take it up, hoping that SCOTUS will rule against out-of-home-carry as fundamental to the 2A.
 
For the time being. My bet is this goes to the SCOTUS and who knows how they will rule. Does the SCOTUS go by original intent or by someone's political agenda.

I don't think this will go to the SCOTUS because this is based off the Heller decision.
 
I don't think this will go to the SCOTUS because this is based off the Heller decision.

We shall see. The article did state that a couple of other federal courts had ruled in favor of similar bans in other states and that the SCOTUS usually takes up these types of cases. Time will tell.
 
I'm not at all sure I fully understand the differences between the two, but if they are as I think, this decision makes sense.
 
I was taught to never look a gift horse in the mouth, just be thankful you get to ride instead of walk.

Seems to me the 9th court is just doing it's job, for all the left lean some see in it... but funny how now the rants about 'non-elected activist judges' and a 'tyrannical bench' will not be coming from the usual posters in the forum... :mrgreen:

Someone once cited a study that the CONs are a more happy, fun loving bunch- damn sure can't tell that from the doom and gloom attitude so far.

Smile, this is a good thang.... :peace
 
So what do you guys think of the 9th circuit ruling that California must be a shall issue state when in comes to conceal carry permits.

I think it is a very good ruling and gives California's some freedom back to them that the state took away from them.

California ban on concealed weapons overturned by 9th Circuit appeals court


I suspect that one of two things is happening here. Hell has frozen over and liberal judges are actually respecting someone's right to bear arms or liberal judges are hoping that since they are most overturn court in history that the SCOTUS will reverse the 9th's decision.
 
I suspect that one of two things is happening here. Hell has frozen over and liberal judges are actually respecting someone's right to bear arms or liberal judges are hoping that since they are most overturn court in history that the SCOTUS will reverse the 9th's decision.
Or they know that ruling for it would be pointless and they would be overturned by the higher court anyway?
 
I was taught to never look a gift horse in the mouth, just be thankful you get to ride instead of walk.

Seems to me the 9th court is just doing it's job, for all the left lean some see in it... but funny how now the rants about 'non-elected activist judges' and a 'tyrannical bench' will not be coming from the usual posters in the forum... :mrgreen:

Someone once cited a study that the CONs are a more happy, fun loving bunch- damn sure can't tell that from the doom and gloom attitude so far.

Smile, this is a good thang.... :peace

The Constitution is a gift horse? Interesting POV.
 
It's a bit of an odd decision for the 9th 'Circus' IMO... they've usually been classified as rather far left-leaning, as well as the most-reversed court in America.

One wonders if their purpose is to force the Supremes to take it up, hoping that SCOTUS will rule against out-of-home-carry as fundamental to the 2A.

That's what is scary, the 9th is the most liberal Federal Circuit Court in America and when the 9th rules on anything they usually gets it wrong and the SCOTUS usually over rules the 9th.

I believe Obama only needs to appoint one more liberal activist to the SCOTUS and America is screwed big time.
 
The California law is a bad one. Rights should be granted by default, with the state being requiring to provide a compelling interest to limit it, not the other way around.
 
The California law is a bad one.
Which is why there should be a National law, another failing of the 10th amendment.
Rights should be granted by default
Which rights and who is to determine them ?
with the state being requiring to provide a compelling interest to limit it, not the other way around.
With the anything goes gun-posters on dp, I'll take my chances with any form of gov't .
 
Which is why there should be a National law, another failing of the 10th amendment.

Which rights and who is to determine them ?

With the anything goes gun-posters on dp, I'll take my chances with any form of gov't .

Well the Second Amendment is the national law when it comes to citizens bearing arms.

I don't see where the Tenth Amendment comes into play. When states start regulating guns, they are violating the Second Amendment.

Every state, county and municipal law or regulation that violates the Second Amendment should be overturned and declared unconstitutional.

It's time to start holding elected officials, legislatures, etc. to the oath they have taken to upholding and defending the Constitution. Any elected official who has voted for any law that violates the Second Amendment or any other part of the Constitution should be tried and convicted and sentenced to six years of hard labor. Bring back the chain gangs for convicted politicians who violate Americans Constitutional Rights.

That would put over 2/3 of California's state legislatures on the chain gang. I like that.
 
Last edited:
Which is why there should be a National law, another failing of the 10th amendment.

There is a national law on the subject, and it is the only one that we need—the Second Amendment.

What we need, now, is for this law to be strictly obeyed and enforced.
 
Last edited:
Well the Second Amendment is the national law when it comes to citizens bearing arms.

I don't see where the Tenth Amendment comes into play. When states start regulating guns, they are violating the Second Amendment.

Every state, county and municipal law or regulation that violates the Second Amendment should be overturned and declared unconstitutional.

It's time to start holding elected officials, legislatures, etc. to the oath they have taken to upholding and defending the Constitution. Any elected official who has voted for any law that violates the Second Amendment or any other part of the Constitution should be tried and convicted and sentenced to six years of hard labor. Bring back the chain gangs for convicted politicians who violate Americans Constitutional Rights.

Not nearly enough. Twenty years, minimum, for each violation. Consecutive, not concurrent. And a lifetime ban on holding any government job or position. For a public servant to willfully violate the Constitution needs to be treated as a very, very serious crime.
 
Last edited:
Not nearly enough. Twenty years, minimum, for each violation. Consecutive, not concurrent. And a lifetime ban on holding any government job or position. For a public servant to willfully violate the Constitution needs to be treated as a very, very serious crime.

Hey Bob :2wave:

I concur.

I wasn't joking or trying to be funny, I'm serious.

Every elected politician from a city council member or water board member, County commissioner, Sheriff, to the state legislature and the Governor, etc. all take an oath of office and that oath states they will uphold and defend just not the state constitution but the Constitution of the United States of America.

And there are just too many elected politicians in America who have failed to uphold the oath of office they have taken and don't have to answer to anyone. They can't even be sued as individuals.

You start sending these politicians or anyone who has taken the oath to uphold and defend the Constitution who violated the oath of office to prison, we might start getting back all of the personal rights and freedoms we use to have at one time.

Six years is pretty lenient, but I was including hard labor. Bring back the chain gangs. 12 hours a day turning boulders into gravel. Those who physically can't swing a sledgehammer, then 20 years in with the general prison population.

I'm serious. I've had enough of having my rights taken away. I'm old enough to remember the individual freedoms I once had and no longer have today.

Every activist judge in America who legislates from the bench should be purged from the bench. Including those on the SCOTUS. Send them to prison to.
 
So what do you guys think of the 9th circuit ruling that California must be a shall issue state when in comes to conceal carry permits.

I think it is a very good ruling and gives California's some freedom back to them that the state took away from them.

California ban on concealed weapons overturned by 9th Circuit appeals court

Definitely a good decision. If someone meets the requirements to get a concealed carry permit, they should get it. The state shouldn't be allowed to deny it just because.
 
The Constitution is a gift horse? Interesting POV.

More CON deflection.... how ahhhhh unique.... :roll:

Oh no my out in right field friend, the gift is a favorable ruling from the 9th 'circus' court (as some CONs love to call it). To hear the CON opine you'd think it is an E-Vile plot to give the 2nd A another kick in the nads... :doh

What has amazed me about the chest beater 2nd A crowd is they mostly just sit in the trees flinging poo rather than come down, wash their feces stained hands and take the issue to court and get the rights sorted out.

When I read the ruling my first thought was about damn time someone out there finally shut up and nut up by taking this to court and seeing it through...
 
More CON deflection.... how ahhhhh unique.... :roll:

Oh no my out in right field friend, the gift is a favorable ruling from the 9th 'circus' court (as some CONs love to call it). To hear the CON opine you'd think it is an E-Vile plot to give the 2nd A another kick in the nads... :doh

What has amazed me about the chest beater 2nd A crowd is they mostly just sit in the trees flinging poo rather than come down, wash their feces] stained hands and take the issue to court and get the rights sorted out.

When I read the ruling my first thought was about damn time someone out there finally shut up and nut up by taking this to court and seeing it through...

Oh! A court rules that our consritutional rights are, indeed, constitutional and it's a gift?
 
Not nearly enough. Twenty years, minimum, for each violation. Consecutive, not concurrent. And a lifetime ban on holding any government job or position. For a public servant to willfully violate the Constitution needs to be treated as a very, very serious crime.

Does that include the right wing nut laws that get declared unconstitutional as well??? I think many TPs will hate the prison system.... :peace

May the forks not be your petard... :peace
 
Oh! A court rules that our consritutional rights are, indeed, constitutional and it's a gift?

Ahh my out in right field CON man- trouble with context, even over the Con game POV, color me amazed.... ;)

So decried is the 9th Court by the right wing talk machine that this ruling is truly manna from heaven and all most CONs can do is line up warbling about 'the trap' or some such silliness. :roll:

Some folks would bitch even if they used a new rope.... :peace
 
Does that include the right wing nut laws that get declared unconstitutional as well??? I think many TPs will hate the prison system.... :peace

May the forks not be your petard... :peace

Sure. Why not? I'm opposed to any law that violates our civil rights.
 
Back
Top Bottom