9th Circuit issues 2A gun sales ruling

[Osarion]

Wonder what that will mean to "shall issue" states?

This going to SCOTUS sounds like a losing situation for us. if they don't take the case, the lower court decisions stand. If they do take the case, it seems like a left leaning verdict is more probable than not.

I don't think it will change much. The 2A allowing for CC constitutionally was already ambiguous before the decision, or you wouldn't have "may issue" states.

This doesn't mean that we'll all go "may issue", just that it's not specifically designated by the 2A and is therefore decided upon by the states... Which it already was anyway.

 

[PiratePast40]

^^^ my concern is that it may encourage Prozanski, Burdick, and their ilk, to introduce legislation for Oregon to go "may issue" since it's already approved by the 9th Circuit.

Or am I interpreting this wrong?

 

[kilimanjaro]

^^^ my concern is that it may encourage Prozanski, Burdick, and their ilk, to introduce legislation for Oregon to go "may issue" since it's already approved by the 9th Circuit.

Or am I interpreting this wrong?

No, you are entirely correct. Regardless of what the law may be today, every media article I read today about this totally bogus, poorly reasoned, and very appealable ruling said this was a 'major blow to gun right activists', which is demonstrably a lie outside of the state of California, and in fact the two Counties that were the subject of the case.

But, that certainly has not prevented the media from suddenly and seemingly colluding together to present to the public the view that somehow this is a battle front in the fight against guns, and their side, the good side, has just won one for the Gipper. Look for the anti-gunners to demagogue this issue of 'Good Cause' as far as they can, including the initiative process here in Washington, as well as attempts to pass it through the legislatures of as many leftist states as they can.

Bottom line for us gun owners, vote and vote like you mean it.

 

[Skier]

For Oregon, we've GOT to get this on the ballot and get it passed:

<broken link removed>

 

[Doc In UPlace]

"The case challenged an Alameda County ordinance that prohibits gun stores from being located within 500 feet of a residential zone. Writing for the majority, Judge Diarmuid F. O'Scannlain noted that, "the Ordinance burdened conduct protected by the Second Amendment and that it therefore must be subjected to heightened scrutiny—something beyond mere rational basis review,"

A good step in pushing back punitive anti-gun measures based on a ridiculous premise, that if a gun store is 499 feet from a house, then the public is somehow in danger of buying guns they wouldn't have otherwise considered.

So let's be happy the court ruled in favor of good sense and skip the obligatory fatalistic pessimism. That'd be good.

 

[Doc In UPlace]

I would love to see SB941 overturned by this, but I suspect that they'll say that you can buy and sell all you want, as long as you get a BG check, and that those don't KEEP you from buying or selling (unless you're a prohibited person), rather BG checks are just part of the process for buying and selling.

How does a background check bill have anything to do whatsoever with an ordinance prohibiting gun shops within 500 feet of a residence??

Don't answer! It doesn't!

 

[2506]

Would be a non/participation fine, not a poll tax... Which was a tax for the privilege to vote.

I'm on board with that. It's maddening that our elected officials really only represent a fraction of the people. Less than 50% of the eligible populace is registered, and of that only a very small percentage actually vote.

In terms of requiring employment, land ownership, etc to vote I think the courts have ruled that is a de facto poll tax. I could be wrong. I usually am.

 

[2506]

Further, I just realized that the penalty you pay for not having health insurance was ruled 'not a tax', so logically a penalty for not voting would be the same. I'm all for it.

 

[Diamondback]

On the other hand, with how little people can actually be BOTHERED to know what they're voting for... maybe those in Handout Land should be offered payment to *not* vote.

If all they're gonna inform themselves by is *feelings* derived from Lamestream Media propaganda worthy of Josef Goebbels... do we really want them continuing to light dumpster-fires like the Orange-Hued Clownshow?