A California law banning the carrying of firearms in most public places is blocked again

[Old_Me]

LOS ANGELES (AP) — A new California law that bans people from carrying firearms in most public places was once again blocked from taking effect Saturday as a court case challenging it continues.

A 9th Circuit Court of Appeals panel dissolved a temporary hold on a lower court injunction blocking the law. The hold was issued by a different 9th Circuit panel and had allowed the law to go into effect Jan. 1.

MSN

 

[Hammer67]

I'm increasingly convinced that the strategy of the anti-2A legislature in CA is to pass so many laws that egregiously violate the Constitution that they will overwhelm the Circuit Court and SCOTUS.

Between 2A challenges and all the rulings that are being asked of SCOTUS surrounding election laws, I really think they are trying to inundate the judiciary until they get their way, and/or bolster their case for expanding the number of SCOTUS seats. It's a tried and true tactic - overwhelm something until it appears to be dysfunctional, and then point out that it is insufficient and therefore needs to be expanded.

 

[Anchorsaweigh]

I don't see commiefornia passing any laws requiring mandatory terms for criminals in possession of firearms. All their laws target law-abiding citizens. Proof that government fears an armed citizenry.

Just my 2¢

Cheers

Bob

 

[Bassbob]

I got no beef with people who want to live in California. Just keep your crazy, unconstitutional laws to yourselves please.

 

[Cedric]

I'm increasingly convinced that the strategy of the anti-2A legislature in CA is to pass so many laws that egregiously violate the Constitution that they will overwhelm the Circuit Court and SCOTUS.

Between 2A challenges and all the rulings that are being asked of SCOTUS surrounding election laws, I really think they are trying to inundate the judiciary until they get their way, and/or bolster their case for expanding the number of SCOTUS seats. It's a tried and true tactic - overwhelm something until it appears to be dysfunctional, and then point out that it is insufficient and therefore needs to be expanded.

They not only want to inundate the judiciary, they financially bleed individuals and 2A advocacy groups dry. It's their way.

 

[rcurtner]

Sorry I got into trouble for my California reply. Probably should have thought that one out a little better.

 

[Old_Me]

Sorry I got into trouble for my California reply. Probably should have thought that one out a little better.

you and me BOTH brother.....



i was like...WTF did i say to get my posting removed..???

that's the problem with "some" of us older guys.....we forget way to easily....


maybe instead of CA, you should have said..Nevada....??

"it's allowed" there........