Ammo For Sale

« « Gun Porn | Home | Thoughts on scout rifles » »

“good cause” requirement challenge in Cali

A three judge panel said the requirement was unconstitutional. The full court said infringing rights is okey dokey. It may get to the Supreme Court.

5 Responses to ““good cause” requirement challenge in Cali”

  1. Mike V Says:

    If the election goes the wrong way, I really truly hope they don’t take it to the Supreme Court. It could end very badly.

  2. mikee Says:

    Get ready for it to end badly, then. Hillary has this election stolen already.

    The dissent in Heller can be applied to any individual right: sure, we all agree individuals have rights but the exercise of those rights may be banned completely for any reason one can imagine.

  3. SPQR Says:

    Hawkins got himself lost I’m afraid. The 3 judge panel decision noted that California had banned both open and effectively concealed and that was inconsistent with Heller. The en banc decision dishonestly ignored that argument entirely.

  4. Ron W Says:

    Much of the judiciary, especially federal, are lawless renegades. I think it’s largely because of the ridiculous and false idea that ” judges are independent”. No! They are “bound by the law” according to Article VI, Section 2 of the Constitution.

  5. Ron W Says:

    “It has long been my opinion, and I have never shrunk from its expression,… that the germ of dissolution of our Federal Government is in the constitution of the Federal Judiciary–an irresponsible body (for impeachment is scarcely a scare-crow), working like gravity by night and by day, gaining a little today and a little tomorrow, and advancing its noiseless step like a thief over the field of jurisdiction until all shall be usurped from the States and the government be consolidated into one. To this I am opposed.” –Thomas Jefferson to Charles Hammond, 1821

Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.

Uncle Pays the Bills

Find Local
Gun Shops & Shooting Ranges


bisonAd

Categories

Archives