Yeah because I’m sure when the 2nd was created the founding fathers vision was everyone in America carrying a gun that can can get rid of more rounds than their entire colonial army could. It’s still a stupid law.
Yeah it is. Because I guarantee you, in California, it’s not your typical good ole boy who was raised with a gun. It’s a hipster douchebag wants a sweet Luger to match his affliction t shirt.
Yes I am sure had there been liberals in charge of the cave men they would have limited the amount of rocks they could carry and called it assault weapons. You could only carry 5 rocks or no rocks at all. They would be all for "banning the boulder" too. Great point you have
This wasn't an en banc review, only a 3-judge panel so it's not necessarily a representation of the 9th's overall opinion with 29 judges. CA will absolutely want an en banc review since this is of significant public interest. The Court would then decide if they want to review the panel decision......and they will. The decision is suspended once the court decides to grant the en banc review. I don't know if there is a time constraint on when they have to file the appeal. If they do not file, the decision becomes law, unless and until SCOTUS accepts the case. My lay understanding is that this decision applies to those states within the district that already have similar laws on the books. I'll research further but I don't believe CA would now be considered an open carry state. There was actually another case prior to this one that blocked a CA law that not only banned “large capacity” magazines but required their confiscation from owners who didn’t “voluntarily” surrender them. That's about as close as we've seen to the government coming to take guns and some here think that concept was just a scare tactic/joke. NOT. Anyway, I think both 3-judge panels had the opinion written by the same guy. This article speaks to both cases and how they could end up at SCOTUS. https://www.thenewamerican.com/usne...uling-could-take-gun-control-debate-to-scotus
I'm still confused but California outlawed open carry in 2012. If the California law and the Hawaii law have no material differences, if this case stands, it would seem to invalidate California law too. However, there doesn't seem to be anything concrete on the timing of an en banc review so it would seem dubious to start openly carrying here.
Not sure... but I remember seeing something about either McDonald vs Chicago or Heller vs DC that was pretty firm in an individual's right to have a firearm that was an influence in this case... Im not 100% sure my memory is correct... but i dont think that there will not be a move to the supreme court or other appeal because of the supreme court case already.
We in the south are not at a loss for Nickleback fans and other mouth breathing nerds. The good news is that it is already like the wild west in LA (Boyle Heights, Compton, Murder Valley for those that know Moreno Valley on the eastside), so everything will sort itself out.
Until dear and ducks start packing glocs for the time being we need the guns to protect us from our fellow man. It's really is that simple.
