• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

How to restore gun right in Calif.

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
Coos County Sheriff Craig Zanni, who is now tasked with deciding which gun laws are in line with the Constitution, told the Oregonian last month that while he is a strong gun rights advocate, he had concerns about whether he had the authority to make those decisions.

“I’m not sure the courts would agree with that concept,” he said. “I would just bet there would be some legal challenges to it.”

Hans von Spakovsky, a senior legal fellow at The Heritage Foundation, said the Supremacy Clause in the Constitution leaves “no question that federal law trumps state law” and that any sheriff who violates a state law requirement could run into legal issues.

“On the other hand, while federal law can override state and local laws, the federal government cannot force local officials to enforce federal law,” he noted.

A local official being told that he cannot expend local funds to enforce federal laws/mandates has less than nothing to do with restoring gun rights.

But that's just my opinion and I'm open to hearing how you figure it does.

stay safe.
 

Robin47

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2008
Messages
545
Location
Susanville, California, USA
A local official being told that he cannot expend local funds to enforce federal laws/mandates has less than nothing to do with restoring gun rights.

But that's just my opinion and I'm open to hearing how you figure it does.

stay safe.

When researching it more, this article the people in that county, are puttinng it to a vote to get their gun rights restored.

http://www.cooscountywatchdog.com/b...eservation-petition-submitted-to-county-clerk

http://www.cooscountywatchdog.com/second-amendment-preservation-ordinance.html

Its an Ordinance, think of it this way, "If bad rules can be passed in countis, then so can Good laws :)
We must fight back from a local leval.
What the state does the "We the People" are the right voice !
 

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
http://www.cooscountywatchdog.com/u...t_preservation_ordinance_2015_~_certified.pdf - I'll be damned if there is something (anything) in there that I missed that addresses the restoration of gun right. Please help this doddering old codger see where it is.

35.
f)
This Ordinance acknowledges provisions of preexisting law that:
1. Prohibit the possession of firearms by certain felons per ORS 166.270;
2. Prohibit the purchasing or possession of firearms by individuals who have
been adjudicated mentally ill and a danger to self and others per ORS
426.130.
3. Prohibit the possession of unlawful machine guns, short
-barreled shot guns and silencers per ORS 166.272.
4. Prohibit the possession of unlawful concealed firearms, or po
ssession by minors per ORS 166.250.
5. Prohibit the possession of firearms in public buildings or court facilities per
ORS 166.360
-
166.370.
6. Prohibit the possession of firearms to certain convicted domestic violence
perpetrators under the Gun Control Act of 1968.

stay safe.
 

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust

rightwinglibertarian

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2014
Messages
827
Location
Seattle WA
The very thread question admits defeat. Every citizen in every state has the right to bear arms with zero right by the government to impose restrictions. The answer is nothing short of mass nullification. Even by acknowledging the existence of infringements is compromise.
 

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
The very thread question admits defeat. Every citizen in every state has the right to bear arms with zero right by the government to impose restrictions. The answer is nothing short of mass nullification. Even by acknowledging the existence of infringements is compromise.

Not just citizens ... everyone.

I like nullification -- I have preached it at state legislature's public hearings. Oddly enough when my 3 minutes to give testimony are up and the bell dings ... they cut me off and say "no more from you" but folks who say what they want can ramble on for days.
 

Law abider

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
1,164
Location
Ellsworth Wisconsin
You have these rights now, they are just being oppressed. When people realize this then things would move forward quite quickly.

How about a starting a Gandhi style rebellion. Declare you have 2a rights, be familiar with all SCOTUS and state rulings defending 2A, form a 10,000 man march ocing your hand guns and have the money to hire the best 2a lawyer, be prepared to go to jail first. Do the opposite of Black Lives Matter, don't burn down your city or town. Keep taking the 2a case to courts by getting the backing of a super pak. It worked in India.
 

utbagpiper

Banned
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,061
Location
Utah
How about a starting a Gandhi style rebellion. Declare you have 2a rights, be familiar with all SCOTUS and state rulings defending 2A, form a 10,000 man march ocing your hand guns and have the money to hire the best 2a lawyer, be prepared to go to jail first. Do the opposite of Black Lives Matter, don't burn down your city or town. Keep taking the 2a case to courts by getting the backing of a super pak. It worked in India.

It might work a bit faster if those 10,000 supporters of RKBA would all show up for jury duty, do their level best not to get excluded, and then simply refused to convict for violation of any unconstitutional law restricting RKBA.

It doesn't take huge numbers to prevent bad convictions, if those who strongly support a position don't exclude themselves and don't back down or get stupid during deliberations.

Even if only 10% of the population strongly support RKBA, it would be rather difficult to get a conviction on an unconstitutional gun law if that 10% can avoid getting excluded from jury service. Assume a 12 person jury.

The odds that the first jury doesn't support RKBA is 0.9. The odds that the second person doesn't support RKBA is also 0.9. But the odds of getting two persons in a row who don't support RKBA is 0.9 * 0.9 = 0.81. The odds of seating a 12 person jury with no supporters of RKBA on it would be 0.9 ^ 12 = 0.28.

This means that in 7 out of 10 jury trials, prosecutors would be unable to get a conviction even in the face of evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. They'd wind up with a hung jury. Raise the percentage of RKBA supporters (willing to nullify) to 20% and the odds of conviction drop to 7%: 14 out of 15 such trials would end in a hung jury despite the evidence.

How long do you figure prosecutors keep wasting time on charges that result in a hung jury between 72 and 93% of the time?
 

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
So nobody wants to talk about the specific piece of paper on the table?

stay safe.
 

Law abider

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
1,164
Location
Ellsworth Wisconsin
It might work a bit faster if those 10,000 supporters of RKBA would all show up for jury duty, do their level best not to get excluded, and then simply refused to convict for violation of any unconstitutional law restricting RKBA.

It doesn't take huge numbers to prevent bad convictions, if those who strongly support a position don't exclude themselves and don't back down or get stupid during deliberations.

Even if only 10% of the population strongly support RKBA, it would be rather difficult to get a conviction on an unconstitutional gun law if that 10% can avoid getting excluded from jury service. Assume a 12 person jury.

The odds that the first jury doesn't support RKBA is 0.9. The odds that the second person doesn't support RKBA is also 0.9. But the odds of getting two persons in a row who don't support RKBA is 0.9 * 0.9 = 0.81. The odds of seating a 12 person jury with no supporters of RKBA on it would be 0.9 ^ 12 = 0.28.

This means that in 7 out of 10 jury trials, prosecutors would be unable to get a conviction even in the face of evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. They'd wind up with a hung jury. Raise the percentage of RKBA supporters (willing to nullify) to 20% and the odds of conviction drop to 7%: 14 out of 15 such trials would end in a hung jury despite the evidence.

How long do you figure prosecutors keep wasting time on charges that result in a hung jury between 72 and 93% of the time?

Why of course! Jury nullification!
 

rightwinglibertarian

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2014
Messages
827
Location
Seattle WA
Why of course! Jury nullification!
How much do you want to bet the judge will find some way of prosecuting that? With runaway qualified immunity, even illegal rulings are considered binding, even if the are blatantly unconstitutional. Judges have been known to throw out lawful rulings and jury decisions and make an illegal ruling which of course in this post constitutional era stand.

Sent from my HTC Desire 626s using Tapatalk
 

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust

Robin47

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2008
Messages
545
Location
Susanville, California, USA

According to a new judgment from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, Montana felons who have completed their sentence and probation will no longer be able to own firearms.


I don't care how judges who I don't vote for think ... just me?

I agree ! Only outlaws will be armed :)
Anyway I always wonder why none of these Oath breakers are arrested, I guess Oaths don't matter anymore.
When swearing to defend the Constitution both Fed and state ones, and then turn around and go against it.
It seems the local Sheriffs need to be doing a better job, in thier respective counties.

With this French attact, by Isis, we do need to arm up, and now we will see how our local Leos
will weigh in of this.
Are we to just be gun down by terrorist now, because we can't OC now ?
Are we expected to buy permission (CCW) to protect our selves ?
Might have to look to a free state now :)
 

28kfps

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2012
Messages
1,534
Location
Pointy end and slightly to the left
How much do you want to bet the judge will find some way of prosecuting that? With runaway qualified immunity, even illegal rulings are considered binding, even if the are blatantly unconstitutional. Judges have been known to throw out lawful rulings and jury decisions and make an illegal ruling which of course in this post constitutional era stand.

Sent from my HTC Desire 626s using Tapatalk

Also they have the ability to change the word illegal and millions of voters have accepted it. Undocumented alien one example. It will not be long and the street corner drug pusher will be accepted as an unlicensed pharmacist. If gun rights could only be as popular as gay rights, we get media support, Hollywood support, large corporations support, Federal and many states government support.
The sad thing we have an amendment that trumps all.
 
Last edited:

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
If only cops would not arrest law abiding citizens peaceably exercising their 2A protected right. Cops proclaim to support our 2A protected right while placing the cuffs on the law abiding citizens peaceably exercising their 2A protected right.

Hold can I determine when a 2A related case will go to jury trial vs. being settled out of court.

How to restore gun rights in the PDRC? Don't know, but 2A supporters in the PDRC would do better to move to Colorado and other "near by states" to counter the influx of Californians in those states.
 

28kfps

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2012
Messages
1,534
Location
Pointy end and slightly to the left
I live two miles from the CA. line. As a rule I open carry one full size 40 and a backup in my pocket. For the most part I can go and usually do, everywhere including traveling to different states. Shopping, restraints, Doctors just a few examples. Fry’s Electronics in Las Vegas is a fun place to open carry many do as we have people from all over the world visiting. Interesting enough the foreigners does not appear to be too worried about it. Occasional I do get asked and usually the person asking is from California. Back to my point if I travel two miles west I turn from an upstanding hard working grandfather, and husband still working a career for over 41 years to a felon breaking a law that could put me in prison for 10 years. Carrying a Non Cal 40 firearm, 3ea 16 round mags, and a concealed revolver. I am on a public road my personality and demeanor is the same the only thing that would make me a felon is an invisible line on a public road on one side I am good to go for several thousands of miles move a few feet west past the line I am a felon. How did we let this happen?
 
Last edited:

Dave_pro2a

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
2,132
Location
, ,
You have these rights now, they are just being oppressed. When people realize this then things would move forward quite quickly.


I can't believe you have the gall to compare GUN rights to riding a BUS.

Shameless.

Next you're compare it to 2 gay people who want to marry.

Or a 5 or 6 Mormons who want to marry.
 

Firearms Iinstuctor

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2011
Messages
3,428
Location
northern wis
move a few feet west past the line I am a felon. How did we let this happen?

A slow increase in laws pushed by the progressives, communists, anti's, media or what ever you want to call them.

It has been a lot like the frog in the pot.

But we have been winning we have more states with so called constitutional carry, more states with shall issue permits, We can buy ammo through the "mail"

Yes its has been a slow road to, but the anti's didn't do it over night either.

There have been states that have became worst CA is one of them.

Over all we have be gaining.

There is still a lot of hard work ahead of us.

The holy grail of the supreme court ruling shall not infringe, means shall not infringe could be soon or never.

I am not holding my breath for it.
 
Top