Ruger Forum banner
21 - 39 of 39 Posts

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
5,286 Posts
Chances are the SCOTUS won’t take this case. What I bet you will see is that in the New York case that was argued a couple weeks ago, in a pro-2A ruling, it will affirm that the proper method to determine constitutionality is text, history, and tradition. So, I would expect that this will get sent back down from the SCOTUS to be looked at using that analysis compared to the public safety argument currently used.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
86 Posts
May be this will put things in prospective.

If the SCOTUS does take the case.

Since 2007, the 9th Circuit had a reversal rate of 79.2 percent. That puts it in second place behind the 6th Circuit (81.1 percent). The circuit with the lowest rate of overturned decisions is the First Circuit at 51.9 percent.
 

·
Registered
Ruger .44 Carbine, Security-Six, Service-Six, Mini-14, .30 Carbine Blackhawk
Joined
·
813 Posts
They have already agreed to hear one 2A case. And with the current makeup, I suspect they will hear this one.
Maybe, but that case is about handgun carry, which historically is the type of 2nd amendment case SCOTUS hears.
They have declined to hear cases regarding magazine limitations or assault weapons bans, for that matter.
But there is always a chance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Super Trucker

·
Banned
Joined
·
4,564 Posts
SCOTUS may have their hands full. Assuming the case argued last month is decided in favor of 2A rights, the anti-2A states are already strategizing about how they can refuse to comply with the decision.
I don't see evidence of your point, antis haven't reversed Heller.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
245 Posts
I don't see evidence of your point, antis haven't reversed Heller.
By citing Heller, you've just made my point. 13 years after Heller, self-defense is effectively illegal in the anti-2A states. For self-defense purposes, would you rely on a weapon that you haven't test fired? Of course not, if you can't take your weapon to the range to test it, then self-defense is "impermissibly" impaired under the Heller standard. The anti-2A states simply decided that they don't agree with Heller so they made it risky to take your weapon to the range.

In NJ, the exception to the prohibition on concealed carry, that you may take the weapon to the range, is so narrowly drawn that the exception basically doesn't exist. If your car breaks down on the way to the range, then you've violated the narrowly drawn exception for taking it to the range. As a result of violating NJ's narrowly drawn exception, you're now a convicted felon, and not allowed to own weapons.

This is not an academic concern, this has happened to literally thousands of NJ residents. This extreme enforcement is a relatively new phenomenon, within the past 15 or so years. Prior to the 2000s, gun laws generally were not enforced. The effective denial of 2A rights occurred when the anti-2A states began enforcing their gun laws.

By drafting the exception for going to the range too narrowly, NJ has effectively prohibited testing your weapon and has effectively prohibited live-fire training.

Imagine doing this with the First Amendment. All speech is prohibited, unless the government approves of it. This is how NJ and about 6 or 7 other states treat 2A, with the Supreme Court's acquiescence, until now.

 

·
Banned
Joined
·
4,564 Posts
Heller addresses ownership of firearms. As far as the commie states, "a people get the government they deserve".
Now which states ban gun ownership.
And what is the planned non compliance of the yet undecided SCOTUS decision you were previously asked?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mark204

·
Registered
Joined
·
400 Posts
Definition of 'shall not be infringed' has changed a lot since 1770's. If federal right to abortion gets tossed by SCOTUS, you'll start hearing it invoked again, but not where it's actually written.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
245 Posts
Agreed, you totally nailed it. Consider how perfect this timing is. In 2021, the other side abandoned the principle of "my body, my choice," via the mandates, so there could not be a better time to return to a strict construction of constitutional rights, including dismissal of new "rights" not included in the constitution.

Consider Scott Bach's point a few years ago, of imagining doing with the First Amendment what the anti-2A states are doing with the Second Amendment. All speech is prohibited, unless the government approves of it. According to this year's opinion surveys, a large majority on the other side actually now support having the government step in to ban speech they disagree with.

As predicted, our country's abandonment of principle meant it was only a matter of time before they would also take away the First Amendment.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
472 Posts
SCOTUS may have their hands full. Assuming the case argued last month is decided in favor of 2A rights, the anti-2A states are already strategizing about how they can refuse to comply with the decision.
Ask 9 million hunters and gun owners in upstate New York how it started.
"reasonable" Magazine restrictions.

And most of all, Apathy.
Staying home while an NRA meeting had empty chairs downtown. Failure to join a national lobbying org. Failure to write to electeds.
Result: Today it's a felony to sell or gift any gun privately. Even family. Even handing a gun to a buddy while crossing a fence. Up to a year and no more ownership. Ever.
Apathy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
I don't suppose I will EVER understand why whatever happens in "California" can be dictated to the rest of the USA. It has never made sense to me. But...it seems that whatever 'happens' in California spreads like wildfire through the rest of the USA. Makes no sense. Will we/our lawmakers ever learn? I mean even now folks are trying to get out of there due to extreme laws, taxes, cost-of-living, wildfires, etc. (and nobody ever seems to relate 'global warming' to the millions of acres of forest fires that continually burn year after year in California and other parts of the West and Southwest...rather blame it on something else, I suppose... wow...Al Gore's influence, aka: 'go-green, global warming agenda, has cost Americans millions of $ over the years, in my humble opinion)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
Its nice that you have low round count mags but the majority of gun owners are actually affected.
How many million AR-15's have been sold in the last 5 years? Most common handguns hold more than 10 rounds, so I strongly disagree that very few will be affected. It will be millions that are affected.
Super Trucker, you are, of course, very correct!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
70 Posts
*In a blow to responsible Golden State gun owners, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled this week that California’s ban on magazines with a capacity over 10 rounds is constitutional.
*Eight states and the District of Columbia have similar prohibitions on feeding devices, and six other federal appeals courts have upheld those laws, noted Graber.
*I am hoping we can avoid this type of a mess in Ohio. Too bad for law abiding citizens in the Golden State.
*In my old age I am going to attempt work locally to keep this from happening here in the Buckeye State and keep these rights for my granddaughter. Important to vote for responsible politicians if you can find one. Some of these judges are really disappointing. Trying to access here in Ohio what is up locally and it is scary.

www.gunsamerica.com/digest/9th-circuit-upholds-californias-ban-on-large-capacity-magazines/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=20211203_FridayDigest_359gi&utm_campaign=/digest/9th-circuit-upholds-californias-ban-on-large-capacity-magazines/
Bummer! You can always count on the ninth circus!
But..... No matter what state you reside in, if you're like me? Your home is a CONSTITUTIONAL SANCTUARY that you not only follow to the letter, but defend with your life if need be!

Yeah. At my 'advanced' age with VERY LITTLE lose, it's easy to say (and do), but just think if we ALL took that stand!
Molon labe baby!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20 Posts
What the people who want to get rid of guns don't seem to get is, if you could wave a magic wand over the country and make every gun disappear people would still find ways to kill each other. Latest case in point is the worthless piece of crap that killed 6 people and injured a couple dozen more with his SUV.
lets not forget killing each other with a virus...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
137 Posts
What bugs me with all this is that the left hates guns so much but make so much money and spend endless hours patting themselves on the back for (Hollywood) using guns and killing people in their godforsaken movies. They cry and cry about guns.
One of their big things right now is cops with guns. The Sheriff in Los Angeles said the other day that he will do everything he can to get speed up CC permits, "if I can not protect the public they need to be able to protect themselves" (for once I kinda wished I lived in LA county)
Robberies are so bad in L.A. he is recommending not going out of the house with expensive jewelry on, park the nice car and drive a beater. His words.
I'm born and raised in SoCal and sadly it has become a hell hole.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
85 Posts
The
Give an inch and they will want another one and another one in regards to guns and accessories. I have no dog in the fight as all my mags are either six or ten. I have no issue with magazines that hold more.

Having said that, limiting magazines to 10 rounds affects very few average law abiding citizens in any state. The age old problem is that criminals will not be affected either and will have an upper hand.
problem is that if the libs are allowed to control the mag size, what else will they be allowed to control? Caliber? Action type? Number of mags you can have? Number of guns you can have? The places that you can shoot? Ya, ya have to shoot at a range, but what range controls will they want? Can you still shoot on safe rural places? Your own land? Can you borrow a gun? The list is very long and goes on and on, and on. If they can get away with just one restriction it encourages them to go after more.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
85 Posts
I don't suppose I will EVER understand why whatever happens in "California" can be dictated to the rest of the USA. It has never made sense to me. But...it seems that whatever 'happens' in California spreads like wildfire through the rest of the USA. Makes no sense. Will we/our lawmakers ever learn? I mean even now folks are trying to get out of there due to extreme laws, taxes, cost-of-living, wildfires, etc. (and nobody ever seems to relate 'global warming' to the millions of acres of forest fires that continually burn year after year in California and other parts of the West and Southwest...rather blame it on something else, I suppose... wow...Al Gore's influence, aka: 'go-green, global warming agenda, has cost Americans millions of $ over the years, in my humble opinion)
It spreads because if CA can pass a law that is allowed to stand, other states see that they can pass similar laws, that will also be allowed to stand. CA is the test bed, if it is OK there, then it should be OK everywhere. CA is so liberal that they can pass just about any law they want. The CA law then becomes the precedent that can be cited by others. That is why CA has so much influence over the other states.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
245 Posts
what else will they be allowed to control? Caliber? Action type? Number of mags you can have? Number of guns you can have? The places that you can shoot? Ya, ya have to shoot at a range, but what range controls will they want? Can you still shoot on safe rural places? Your own land? Can you borrow a gun? The list is very long and goes on and on, and on. If they can get away with just one restriction it encourages them to go after more.
Agreed, they propose mild sounding commonsense restrictions that will actually have a serious real-world impact if and when enforcement begins. It only took a few such rules in NY & NJ to have the practical effect of prohibiting self-defense here, unless the Supreme Court re-asserts our 2A rights in the NYSRPA case that was argued last month.

Every year, new restrictions are proposed. This happened in Texas after constitutional carry was enacted earlier this year. Before the ink dried some began proposing costly compliance requirements for gun ownership by law-abiding people.
 
21 - 39 of 39 Posts
Top