testtest

Has anyone else seen this!

10mmLife said:
The 9th district court came to a majority ruling that as citizens we have no right to carry open or concealed!

This is what happens when corrupt justices get appointed for political reasons.

Click to expand...

You're interpretation is incorrect. The ruling is not an overall statement that citizens have no right to carry concealed or open nation-wide, but it is a States Rights ruling that the States have the power to make laws not reserved by Constitution for the Federal govt.

Would it have been better that the 9th would state that the Federal Govt has the right to determine carry conditions? No.

The ruling is consistent with the 10th Amendment - The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

This shows the importance for State Legislatures to remain in Conservative hands vs the leftists. Those states like Hawaii that are hard-core left will do what they do,

In relation to this, the proposed National Legislation to license & tax the right to keep and bear arms is unconstitutional at the federal (national) level since the Constitution doesn't reserve the power to tax and license a fundemental right in the Bill of Rights to the Federal Govt..
 
Last edited:
10mmLife said:
It's worse when a major court comes up with this ruling because it's easier for anti 2a politicians to push bad legislation in other states.
Click to expand...
The 9th circuit court of appeals has the most overturn decisions of any court by the US Supreme court. The one fool goes back through 700 years of US and British law but doesn't understand that the Founding Fathers stated this is a God given right neither bestowed by Human influence nor are they able to infringe against it (as well as other Amendments).
 
10mmLife said:
The 9th district court came to a majority ruling that as citizens we have no right to carry open or concealed!

This is what happens when corrupt justices get appointed for political reasons.

Click to expand...
Thanks for posting 10mm,

Is an interesting article. Have a few issues with their judgement or what was written though. Am sure many of us do?
One eye opener is where article came from? - California. Ummm, we all know what sprouts from there?

Never forget "May" in legal terms is whole lot different than "Shall."

Another? Based on over 700 years of English and US laws? The US isn't England which is actually tiny little island and that got the US started as an independent nation because of their unjust views, laws and has screwed up much of what they've ever done throughout history. We may be their "experiment" as they say though? Going on with the 700 years philosophy? US has only existed as a country for 245 years, not even half of 700 years. Again because of British monarchy's dictatorial British law.

And then, if holding to the letter of US law and US Constitution w/o some going into denial? - We all know where this is going? Regulations are still infringements contrary to Our 2nd Amendment purpose and intentions.
 
BET7 said:
The 9th circuit court of appeals has the most overturn decisions of any court by the US Supreme court. The one fool goes back through 700 years of US and British law but doesn't understand that the Founding Fathers stated this is a God given right neither bestowed by Human influence nor are they able to infringe against it (as well as other Amendments).
Click to expand...
Hopefully if this goes to the supreme court it gets tossed!
 
Almost every state has laws that excludes the places where you can carry a firearm, such as schools, legislative chambers, police stations, airports, etc.

As far as open carry of handguns, I personally think it is a bad idea in most instances, and I have a list of reasons why. It also depends upon you locale. A person seen strapped in a grocery store in Idaho will get a very different reaction than in Miami, so I think those decisions are best left to the states.
 
HayesGreener said:
Almost every state has laws that excludes the places where you can carry a firearm, such as schools, legislative chambers, police stations, airports, etc.

As far as open carry of handguns, I personally think it is a bad idea in most instances, and I have a list of reasons why. It also depends upon you locale. A person seen strapped in a grocery store in Idaho will get a very different reaction than in Miami, so I think those decisions are best left to the states.
Click to expand...
You see very little open carry around here in my area of N. Western KY. Recently my grandson and I were at a 7-11 type of store, and a guy came in wearing a drop-leg rig with a full-sized pistol in it. Definitely not a law enforcement individual. Guess he just wanted to be noticed on that particular day. He was....by everyone.
 
I used to live in Arizona. Open carry and concealed carry are both legal there without a permit now. At the time when I first moved there, you needed a permit to carry concealed but not openly. I would see people carrying everywhere. Even in banks and no one was shooting each other. It was normal and no big deal. I preferred to carry concealed. There are no state laws restricting where you can carry. If a court did not provide lockers you could even carry them into court. On one particular spring day, I was stopping at my usual Circle K to get gas and coffee on the way to work. There was a Mercedes at the pump and a beat-up ford Granada parked perpendicular to it and two bodies under yellow blankets near the Mercedes as well as police tape cordoning off the area. I went inside and asked an officer what happened. seems a couple of gang-bangers from California decided to try to carjack the woman driving the Mercedes and she shot them both. Arizona has the right Idea.
 
10mmLife said:
Kinda like California's mag capacity limit being reversed by the 9th district I'm assuming?
Click to expand...
Well that decision was only by a three Judge panel from the 9th circuit. The "En-bloc" (entire), 9th circuit has agreed to revisit this case and decision. It's why places like GunMagWarehouse, haven't yet shipped (to my knowledge), high capacity mags to Cali. yet. But even if the entire 9th circuit reverses this decision, there's a chance the US Supreme court will decide to take up the case.

www.foxnews.com

California's liberal Ninth Circuit to tackle gun rights, mull reinstating high-capacity magazine ban

California’s overturned ban on high-capacity magazines will have a chance at being reinstated after a federal court’s split-decision found it unconstitutional last year.
www.foxnews.com www.foxnews.com
 
10mmLife said:
Kinda like California's mag capacity limit being reversed by the 9th district I'm assuming?
Click to expand...

Unless the original law/filing had Nation-wide implications (only Federal laws) then they apply to the original area of influence that a law covered, whether stae-wide or more local. State court decisions can be both local or state-wide.

So the CA mag limit reversal did not apply to those other states that have mag capacity limits.
 
BET7 said:
Well that decision was only by a three Judge panel from the 9th circuit. The "En-bloc" (entire), 9th circuit has agreed to revisit this case and decision. It's why places like GunMagWarehouse, haven't yet shipped (to my knowledge), high capacity mags to Cali. yet. But even if the entire 9th circuit reverses this decision, there's a chance the US Supreme court will decide to take up the case.

www.foxnews.com

California's liberal Ninth Circuit to tackle gun rights, mull reinstating high-capacity magazine ban

California’s overturned ban on high-capacity magazines will have a chance at being reinstated after a federal court’s split-decision found it unconstitutional last year.
www.foxnews.com www.foxnews.com
Click to expand...

If the full court rules against the "En-Bloc" decision in CA then it still only applies to CA, where the original law was enforced.

Another example, is CA car emissions standards don't apply to the other states, but if car manufacturers choose to make all their vehicles compliant then that's their choice, just like S&W putting "lawyer-locks on their revolvers..

Again no effect to anything outside the borders of CA, unless it's a Federal law.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top