9th circuit court of clowns,Upholds magazine ban???

[Who The F R U]

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a ruling that the Sunnyvale, California, city ordinance, which prohibits the possession of ammunition magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds, does not violate the Second Amendment


This is from the A$$ clowns in the 9th circuit court;

"The Second Amendment right is 'not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose,'" Judge Michael Daly Hawkins wrote for the unanimous three-judge panel. He added, "Sunnyvale's interests in promoting public safety and reducing violent crime were substantial and important government interests. So, too, were Sunnyvale's interests in reducing the harm and lethality of gun injuries in general, and in particular as against law enforcement officers"

______________________________________________________________________

Well apparently these retards haven't read the Dick Act of 1902.

"The three classes H.R. 11654 provides for are the organized militia, henceforth known as the National Guard of the State, Territory and District of Columbia, the unorganized militia and the regular army. The militia encompasses every able-bodied male between the ages of 18 and 45. All members of the unorganized militia have the absolute personal right and 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms of any type, and as many as they can afford to buy."


"The Dick Act of 1902 cannot be repealed; to do so would violate bills of attainder and ex post facto laws which would be yet another gross violation of the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights."

Read More

 

[americanredoubt]

Thanks for posting this. I had been meaning to post news on this, but was too upset, after the courts upheld the Calif DOJ "Allowed Handgun Roster" (which no longer has any S&W or Ruger semi-autos allowed in Kalifornia).

Now all new guns sold by FFLs in Kalifornia must have micro-stamping of the gun's serial number by the striker-hammer on the spent brass -- greatly increasing the cost to the end user. There are currently no new models of Glock (like the Gen 4 or the G42), S&W or Ruger allowed to be sold new in Kalifornia. Both Ruger and S&W are suing the State of California, but given the current last two gun grabbing verdicts of the socialist "justice" system, it is unlikely they will win unless it goes to the Supreme Court.

Additionally, all new guns sold by FFLs in Kalifornia must have a magazine disconnect safety, a manual safety, and a loaded chamber indicator. The statists are planning to implement required finger print reader style owner ID "safety" as the technology goes beyond the beta testing level. If a gun maker such as Glock changes the manufacturer/supplier of even ONE single part on the gun, they must re-certify with DOJ at a high cost. This is how each year fewer and fewer new guns are allowed in Kali as they fall of the DOJ roster due to minor manufacturing supplier changes. But the evil statist elitist Feinstein says there are already plenty enough of diverse models on the DOJ roster to choose from (mostly revolvers and 1911s variations by the way).

Currently in Kalifornia, a private party can sell (Private Party Transfer Face to Face via an FFL doing the "Universal Background Check") a model of gun that is not on the DOJ Roster, but they cannot ship it, only face to face sell it at the FFL. However, the Libtards have put legislation on the agenda to close "loophole" (exception) that allows this. These Libtards in Charge wish to ONLY allow to be sold guns that the DOJ has approved of as "safe" and that are hence on the severely restricted DOJ Roster.

You see, all this is possible since, in addition to Libtards running the state for several decades, the State of California Constitution has no Second Amendment or other provision protecting the RTKBA. At least Oregun does have a Second Amendment.

I was temporarily too sad to blog about yet another loss to socialist tyranny in the once Great State of California (pre-1967), now called the People's Republik of Commifornication with Feinstein, Boxer, Pelosi, Guv Jerry Moonbeam, et al at the helm.

 

[boogerhook]

http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/dickact.asp

I don't think the Dick Act has been interpreted by SCOTUS (or any other court) the way we'd like it.

A more interesting question is whether the act in itself is unconstitutional, as it exerts federal influence into state militias. The anti-federalists, the guys we owe the bill of rights being added, had big concerns about standing armies, especially federally controlled ones. States being able to defend themselves against the federal government that was the real concern. A driving force for adding "well organized militia" to the second amendment. The right to own guns for self-defense was considered a natural right, the right to organize a militia for the defense of the state was what needed to be articulated.

Federal funding for non-federal parts of government has always been the carrot. True for the National Guard, true for influence on the school system (common core, no child left behind) just to name a few.

 

[Who The F R U]

My rights don't come from some whig or a piece of paper.
I was born with them same as any man any where on the planet.
They cant be taken away. I can only choose not to enforce them.

No man shall hold lordship over me unless I allow it.

 

[ZA_Survivalist]

Hang all those who betray the constitution.

I cannot wait if/when SHTF, These folks will feed me for years. Until then Ill just bide my time.

 

[boogerhook]

My rights don't come from some whig or a piece of paper.
I was born with them same as any man any where on the planet.
They cant be taken away. I can only choose not to enforce them.

No man shall hold lordship over me unless I allow it.

That's true indeed, but strength in numbers makes it much easier and pleasant for all of us - hence the Constitution.

 

[John H]

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a ruling that the Sunnyvale, California, city ordinance, which prohibits the possession of ammunition magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds, does not violate the Second Amendment


."

If it doesn't violate the 2nd Amendment it at least violates the ex-de facto law.

 

[1Asterisk]

If it doesn't violate the 2nd Amendment it at least violates the ex-de facto law.

Did you mean ex-post facto?

For reference:

U.S. Constitution - Article 1

Section 9.
No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.

Section 10.
No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.



Defined: Ex post facto

ex post facto adj. Formulated, enacted, or operating retroactively. [Med Lat., from what is done afterwards] Source: AHD

In U.S. Constitutional Law, the definition of what is ex post facto is more limited. The first definition of what exactly constitutes an ex post facto law is found in Calder v Bull (3 US 386 [1798]), in the opinion of Justice Chase:

"1st. Every law that makes an action done before the passing of the law, and which was innocent when done, criminal; and punishes such action. 2d. Every law that aggravates a crime, or makes it greater than it was, when committed. 3d. Every law that changes the punishment, and inflicts a greater punishment, than the law annexed to the crime, when committed. 4th. Every law that alters the legal rules of evidence, and receives less, or different, testimony, than the law required at the time of the commission of the offense, in order to convict the offender."

In other words, and this is my interpretation, the act [action] of keeping and bearing arms w/o infringement [innocent act] established as law by the Second Amendment, Bill of Rights at the time of it's ratification Dec. 15, 1791.

Every law imposed since, regardless the venue [local,state, or federal], that criminalizes and punishes a person that keeps and bears arms w/o infringement, is an ex-post facto law prohibited by Article 1, Section 9, U.S. Constitution.

 

[Classic]

It's Commiefornia... Did you expect anything different?

 

[John H]

Did you mean ex-post facto?

.

Sorry , yeah.

 

[Member 5605]

Only when gun manufacturers quit bending to sell guns in KA will the people wake up.

Every manufacturer needs to quit adapting or modding their guns to conform to KA.

They need to make standard capacity magazines standard. If you can't buy a gun because it's not legal in your state or the magazine is "too big" then maybe you will vote to change stuff. Send a kid to bed hungry and he will think twice about mouthing off to his parents at dinner time about how he doesn't like broccoli.

(KA=Kommieformia)

 

[fuhr52]

The SCOTUS has set the corrupt tone with Obamacare. The order of law is now trump by politics. All hail king Obama!

 

[3MTA3]

The 9th Circuit Court is known as the most overturned court in the country. Their decision is only a confirmation that the magazine ban is wrong.

Too bad Biden isn't on the bench - we could convince him that the magazines are printed and protected by the First Amendment...

 

[Classic]

Every time I see "SCOTUS" I think SCROTUM.. OK, same thing...........................................

 

[BoonDocks36]

The use of Snopes as a ~proof~ to anything has been a constant source for Rebutal here.

The Snopes website is not a place to aquire Truth. They bend and manipulate as needed, and then add a pinch of Truth, and call it Real.

As well, I would not use google either... They have an agenda, it is Not the Agenda that this Patriot agrees with, so Years ago, i started using:

https://www.ixquick.com for all my searches. They Protect your privacy, unlike google who sells you to the highest bidder....

So.... Back on topic, I web searched The Dick Act, and came up with this very interesting Five Page PDF ...

http://www.americannationalmilitia.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/348-The-Dick-Act-of-1902.pdf

I stopped reading after Page Two, so I could return to this, and post it....

In Liberty,

philip

 

[ZigZagZeke]

I have found Snopes to be extremely biased in the areas of guns and climate change, as well as vaccinations. I put no stock in them anymore. As for searches, Apple now enables you to declare DuckDuckGo as your default search engine. Goofy name, but no tracking, no selling your personal information or browsing habits, and no paid placements. I've been using it for a year and it's great.

 

[Gator Monroe]

There are more AR & AK/AKM pattern weapons in California than in any 3 so called "Free States" (You can name the States too) and more Firearms were sold in California in 2014 than in any other State ever.

 

[U201491]

I have found Snopes to be extremely biased in the areas of guns and climate change, as well as vaccinations. I put no stock in them anymore. As for searches, Apple now enables you to declare DuckDuckGo as your default search engine. Goofy name, but no tracking, no selling your personal information or browsing habits, and no paid placements. I've been using it for a year and it's great.

Thanks for that Engine

 

[Caveman Jim]

Snoop is as biased as the old British tabloids of the 80's!!!!

 

[boogerhook]

The use of Snopes as a ~proof~ to anything has been a constant source for Rebutal here.

The Snopes website is not a place to aquire Truth. They bend and manipulate as needed, and then add a pinch of Truth, and call it Real.

As well, I would not use google either... They have an agenda, it is Not the Agenda that this Patriot agrees with, so Years ago, i started using:

https://www.ixquick.com for all my searches. They Protect your privacy, unlike google who sells you to the highest bidder....

So.... Back on topic, I web searched The Dick Act, and came up with this very interesting Five Page PDF ...

http://www.americannationalmilitia.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/348-The-Dick-Act-of-1902.pdf

I stopped reading after Page Two, so I could return to this, and post it....

In Liberty,

philip

Agreed, SNOPES is not a proof of anything. They have been good to call out fakes in technology and web sites, but they are not authoritative by any means. I just googled the Dick Act and they provided their spin and I felt it worth sharing. I still maintain that the Act in itself could be unconstitutional. ;-)