JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Messages
6,985
Reactions
21,487
Case Information: Flanagan v. Becerra, No. 18-55717 (9th Cir. amicus brief filed Nov. 27, 2018).

At Issue: In 2016, an 11-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit appeals court ruled in Peruta v. County of San Diego that the Second Amendment does not protect a right to carry concealed guns in public, since historical evidence shows that governments have long exercised broad authority to regulate or prohibit concealed-carry. Following this decision, which the US Supreme Court declined to review, the National Rifle Association and individual plaintiffs filed a new challenge to the laws restricting California residents from carrying visible, loaded firearms in public. In Flanagan v. Becerra, the NRA now argues that if California allows local law enforcement to restrict concealed-carry, it must allow unrestricted "open-carry" of guns, even in populated areas. The district court rejected this dangerous position and upheld California's open-carry regulations, and the plaintiffs appealed to the Ninth Circuit.

Giffords Law Center's Brief: Our brief in Flanagan argues that California's public-carry laws are constitutional under the applicable standard of review because substantial evidence shows that the state's laws reasonably further critical public safety goals. Social science evidence and empirical studies confirm that lax public-carry laws increase the risk of gun violence. In addition, without reasonable open-carry restrictions like California's, even well-intentioned gun carriers can throw the public and law enforcement officers into a state of potentially deadly confusion.

Read the full text here.
 
You know, I just got to thinking something..... Instead of the NRA and countless other "outside" entities dumping millions of dollars into legal battles in Kommiefornia, why not just completely back away, saving your money/time/effort and let the whole F'ing state implode on itself?

Put that money into newspaper and TV ads to inform the people's of CA what is happening to them?

When the "subjects of CA" see that their rights are being taken away and no one fighting on their behalf, maybe, JUST MAYBE they will open their eyes and start to fight for themselves. Maybe even start voting differently too? Maybe get rid of the infestation of vermin that are turning CA into a pre-draconian state!

Why? Just WHY? is this being allowed and no one can see past their noses to see the long term effects the courts are doing to them and their state.

I shake my head....:oops:
 
Put that money into newspaper and TV ads to inform the people's of CA what is happening to them?

When the "subjects of CA" see that their rights are being taken away and no one fighting on their behalf, maybe, JUST MAYBE they will open their eyes and start to fight for themselves. Maybe even start voting differently too? Maybe get rid of the infestation of vermin that are turning CA into a pre-draconian state!

Why? Just WHY? is this being allowed and no one can see past their noses to see the long term effects the courts are doing to them and their state.

I shake my head....:oops:

A majority of California residents support more gun control and are happy with what is happening there. In a state that already has some of the strictest gun control a majority want more more more.

Poll: Vast Majority Of Californians Support Stricter Gun Laws
Thursday, March 22, 2018

By Kenny Goldberg

California has some of the nation's strictest gun laws.

For example, the state bans assault weapons and has a 10-day waiting period for new gun purchases.

Even so, a new poll from the Public Policy Institute of California finds 70 percent of likely voters favor stronger gun controls. Only 24 percent of people surveyed think gun laws should stay the same.

The PPIC poll reveals support for tougher gun laws is strong even in more conservative parts of California like the Central Valley.

But institute president and CEO Mark Baldassare said the most surprising finding is support among Republicans.

He said a year ago, only a quarter of Republicans said gun laws should be stricter.

"That number doubled. And now, almost half of Republicans now joining overwhelming numbers of Democrats and independent voters in saying there should be some more strict gun controls," Baldassare said.

Read more at Poll: Vast Majority Of Californians Support Stricter Gun Laws

Prop. 63 which added even more gun control in a state with strict gun control passed in 2016 with 63% of the vote.

Nov. 8, 2016, 11:09 p.m.


By Patrick McGreevy
California voters approve gun control measure Proposition 63

Following a year marked by a series of mass shootings, voters on Tuesday approved Proposition 63, which toughens California's already strict gun control laws.

The initiative outlaws the possession of ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 rounds, requires background checks for people buying bullets, makes it a crime not to report lost or stolen guns, and provides a process for taking guns from people upon their conviction for a felony.

The measure was proposed by Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom, who late Tuesday called the vote "historic progress to reduce gun violence."

"It was a repudiation of the National Rifle Assn. and the gun lobby. They lost badly," Newsom said in an interview. "It's a very important initiative because I think it's the beginning of a national debate on relinquishment (by felons) and ammunition background checks that will I think will have a very significant impact on reducing gun violence in this country."

California voters approve gun control measure Proposition 63

Keep in mind that more and more Californians with that pro-gun control mindset are moving to Oregon and Washington every year. Notice how many vehicles have California license plates the next time you drive around.
 
You know, I just got to thinking something..... Instead of the NRA and countless other "outside" entities dumping millions of dollars into legal battles in Kommiefornia, why not just completely back away, saving your money/time/effort and let the whole F'ing state implode on itself?

Put that money into newspaper and TV ads to inform the people's of CA what is happening to them?

When the "subjects of CA" see that their rights are being taken away and no one fighting on their behalf, maybe, JUST MAYBE they will open their eyes and start to fight for themselves. Maybe even start voting differently too? Maybe get rid of the infestation of vermin that are turning CA into a pre-draconian state!

Why? Just WHY? is this being allowed and no one can see past their noses to see the long term effects the courts are doing to them and their state.

I shake my head....:oops:
Because the 9th Circuit's rulings affect other states also.
 

Upcoming Events

Tillamook Gun & Knife Show
Tillamook, OR
"The Original" Kalispell Gun Show
Kalispell, MT
Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR
Kids Firearm Safety 2 Class
Springfield, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top