starwatcher Posted June 5, 2021 at 02:01 AM Share Posted June 5, 2021 at 02:01 AM https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/firearmspolicycoalition/pages/5381/attachments/original/1622850515/Miller_v_Bonta_Opinion.pdf?1622850515 I didn't see a thread on this, lock if its already posted. Basically, Judge ruled Heller protects AR-15's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Euler Posted June 5, 2021 at 02:04 AM Share Posted June 5, 2021 at 02:04 AM ... in Federal District court of Southern CA. Expect an appeal to CA9. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flynn Posted June 5, 2021 at 03:14 AM Share Posted June 5, 2021 at 03:14 AM There are some heads spinning now... Sadly CA9 is fully anti-gun and will almost certainly reverse the decission. The question is how much longer can the Supreme Court ignore further defining the 2nd and allow a patchwork of different 2nd rights by zip code? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobPistol Posted June 5, 2021 at 03:15 AM Share Posted June 5, 2021 at 03:15 AM Like the Swiss Army Knife, the popular AR-15 rifle is a perfect combination of home defense weapon and homeland defense equipment. Good for both home and battle, the AR-15 is the kind of versatile gun that lies at the intersection of the kinds of firearms protected under District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008) and United States v Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939) How much you wanna bet the judge has at least one of them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybermgk Posted June 5, 2021 at 11:57 AM Share Posted June 5, 2021 at 11:57 AM ... in Federal District court of Southern CA. Expect an appeal to CA9.In CA right now "Well, it's a free for all, and I heard it saidYou can bet your lifeStakes are high and so am IIt's in the air tonight" -Ted Nugent, Free For All Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikew Posted June 5, 2021 at 03:31 PM Share Posted June 5, 2021 at 03:31 PM Like the Swiss Army Knife, the popular AR-15 rifle is a perfect combination of home defense weapon and homeland defense equipment. Good for both home and battle, the AR-15 is the kind of versatile gun that lies at the intersection of the kinds of firearms protected under District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008) and United States v Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939) How much you wanna bet the judge has at least one of them? One of each! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamma Posted June 5, 2021 at 05:07 PM Share Posted June 5, 2021 at 05:07 PM Like the Swiss Army Knife, the popular AR-15 rifle is a perfect combination of home defense weapon and homeland defense equipment. Good for both home and battle, the AR-15 is the kind of versatile gun that lies at the intersection of the kinds of firearms protected under District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008) and United States v Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939) How much you wanna bet the judge has at least one of them? Firearm intersectionality Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoYouFeelLucky Posted June 5, 2021 at 05:29 PM Share Posted June 5, 2021 at 05:29 PM Where do my MSR's that identify as single shot bolt action rifles fall in this? Asking for a friend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plinkermostly Posted June 22, 2021 at 10:53 AM Share Posted June 22, 2021 at 10:53 AM CNN: 9th Circuit Appeals Court blocks the overturn of California's assault weapons ban https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/21/politics/california-assault-style-weapons-ban-overturn-blocked/index.html Surprise??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmyers Posted June 22, 2021 at 11:59 AM Share Posted June 22, 2021 at 11:59 AM How is it that they can hear case like this so quickly, yet others take years to be heard? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunuser17 Posted June 22, 2021 at 02:29 PM Share Posted June 22, 2021 at 02:29 PM They didn't hear the case, they heard a motion to stay the district court's order while the appeal was pending. As a result the 9th Circuit put this new case on hold while they decide a very similar case that has already been briefed. As I expect, once the 9th Circuit rules in the older case that the ban is ok, they will remand this new case to the district court telling that court to now take into account the expected decision in the older case. In total, they can then defer dealing with this new Benitez decision for a couple of years at least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobPistol Posted June 22, 2021 at 02:38 PM Share Posted June 22, 2021 at 02:38 PM How is it that they can hear case like this so quickly, yet others take years to be heard? LWW-ism moves fast, the constitution moves slow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmagloo Posted June 22, 2021 at 06:06 PM Share Posted June 22, 2021 at 06:06 PM It's amazing to me that the Bill of Rights is supposed to be beyond reproach and shall not EVER be infringed. However, when politicians clearly design legislation to breach those rights, the entire judicial system plays this game to allow this infringement to exist for months, years, and in some cases decades, until it's convenient to address and it "works" through the system. That a bunch of BS in my mind. The state of Illinois and a few others has crafted an art of gaming the system and playing the cat and mouse game, specifically trying to push the boundaries, and going past, and figuring they will at least have their time in the sun for the duration. This should never be possible. Imho, those who infringe on core individual rights, and those that allow the continuation, should be PERSONALLY responsible and liable for the contributing act for trampling these very important rights. This is F'd up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallbore Posted June 22, 2021 at 06:30 PM Share Posted June 22, 2021 at 06:30 PM Our courts for decades have used their power to usurp our constitution, to usurp liberty. They use their power to protect the increasing power of a dictatorial government. The "states interest" out weights personal liberty. Marxist through and through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.