Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > California  > HUGE victory in California today for the rights of gun owners :)      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 matchlight
Joined: 1/31/2009
Msg: 26
view profile
History
HUGE victory in California today for the rights of gun owners :)Page 2 of 7    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7)

it was respectful, now a proponent just had to dis the opponents....


You mean they don't deserve it? There are a lot of Americans who want to evade everything in the Constitution that doesn't make for the kind of country they'd like. But they can only bend those stupid old words so far.

I should have added earlier that it's the Due Process Clause of the 14th Am. the Court's used to incorporate various parts of the Bill of Rights against the states. And in each case, its reason for doing this was that the right involved was "fundamental." The 9th Circuit panel used this same reasoning--it incorporated the 2d Am. against California because it found it protected a fundamental right.

I haven't read the whole decision, but I'm assuming it applies to all the states in the 9th Circuit's jurisdiction. The full 9th Circuit could overrule the 3-judge panel, but that would be sure to send the issue back to the Supreme Court. It may end up back there anyway. I don't see how there's much question the right to keep and bear arms is fundamental, under the Court's standards. The right was recognized here long before the Constitution--the 2d Am. doesn't *grant* it, but just prohibits Congress from infringing it.
 fzrhusker
Joined: 10/8/2005
Msg: 27
HUGE victory in California today for the rights of gun owners :)
Posted: 4/28/2009 8:29:51 PM
You can read the info and see the DoD letter to Georgia Arms here:
The Shootist Site:
http://www.theshootist.net
FYI FOLKS
This came from GA-VHPA group. (Georgia Vietnam Helicopter Pilots Association)
Save your brass! It has begun!

Barack 0bama is on track to eliminate shooting hobbies, even if it breaks the Country. To all of you who voted for him........sooner or later he'll get around to something that affects YOU.

This is breaking news....

Georgia Arms is the 5th largest retailer of .223 Ammo in America . (they sell 9 mm, 45, etc) They normally buy spent brass from the US Dept of Defense - 'one time used' shell casings by our Military - from training on Military bases, etc. They buy the brass And then re-load for resale to Law Enforcement, Gun Shops, Gun Clubs, etc. They normally buy 30,000 lbs of spent brass at a time.

This week the DoD wrote a letter to the owner of Georgia Arms and said that from now on the DoD will be destroying the brass - shredding it. It is no longer available to the Ammo makers - unless they just buy it in a scrap condition (which they have no use for). By The Way - The brass is NOW going to be sold by the DoD to China as scrap - for less money than Ammo manufacturers have been paying for the shells before processing to destroy. That sure helps the US economy now, doesn't it? Sell cheaper to China - and do not sell shells at all to a proven US business. Any agenda working here?

The Georgia Arms owner even related a story that one of his competitors had already purchased a load of brass last week - and the DoD contacted him this week and said they were sending someone over to make sure it was destroyed. Shell Casings he had already bought! THE BRASS HAS NO VALUE TO THE AMMO MAKER IF IT IS DESTROYED/SHREDDED/MELTED. HE ONLY USES IT TO RELOAD DIFFERENT CALIBERS - MAINLY 223 BULLETS.

Georgia Arms owner says that he will have to lay off at least Half of his 60 workers, within 2 - 3 months if the DoD no longer sells their spent brass to him. He has 2 - 3 months inventory of shells to use. By summer - he's out.


Georgia Arms Site: http://Georgia-arms.com/
 fzrhusker
Joined: 10/8/2005
Msg: 28
HUGE victory in California today for the rights of gun owners :)
Posted: 4/28/2009 8:57:35 PM
FIREARMS REFRESHER COURSE

1. An armed man is a citizen. An unarmed man is a subject.
2. A gun in the hand is better than a cop on the phone.
3. Colt: The original point and click interface.
4. Gun control is not about guns; it's about control.
5. If guns are outlawed, can we use swords?
6. If guns cause crime, then pencils cause misspelled words.
7. Free men do not ask permission to bear arms.
8. If you don't know your rights, you don't have any.
9. Those who trade liberty for security have neither.

10. The United States Constitution (c)1791. All Rights Reserved.

11. What part of 'shall not be infringed' do you not understand?

12. The Second Amendment is in place in case the politicians ignore the
others.

13. 64,999,987 firearms owners killed no one yesterday.
14. Guns only have two enemies; rust and politicians.
15. Know guns, know peace, know safety. No guns, no peace, no safety...
16. You don't shoot to kill; you shoot to stay alive.
17. 911: Government sponsored Dial-a-Prayer.
18. Assault is a behavior, not a device.
19. Criminals love gun control; it makes their jobs safer.
20. If guns cause crime, then matches cause arson.
21. Only a government that is afraid of its citizens tries to control them.
22. You have only the rights you are willing to fight for.
23. Enforce the gun control laws we ALREADY have; don't make more.
24. When you remove the people's right to bear arms, you create slaves.
25. The American Revolution would never have happened with gun control.
 AceOfSpace
Joined: 5/28/2007
Msg: 29
HUGE victory in California today for the rights of gun owners :)
Posted: 4/28/2009 9:32:02 PM

As for safe storage, I think you have to take the cicumstances into consideration. Since I live alone, and have no children as visitors, having a loaded gun handy is in no hazard to anyone. BTW my house is always locked and has an alarm system as well.


You had me worried for a moment there. But if a gun in your house is as secure as it would be if it were in a gun safe, no worries. I don't care _how_ you keep it secure, so long as you do.


I do not think laws concerning storage of firearms are constitutional. If they are locked up and unloaded how does that jive with
"bear arms".


I hear you. OTOH, a loaded gun in a nightstand could be considered an attractive nuisance. I have no problem with gun ownership, but I do have a problem with _irresponsible_ gun owners. They just give ammunition to the people who favor bans.
 AceOfSpace
Joined: 5/28/2007
Msg: 30
HUGE victory in California today for the rights of gun owners :)
Posted: 4/28/2009 9:35:15 PM

I should have added earlier that it's the Due Process Clause of the 14th Am. the Court's used to incorporate various parts of the Bill of Rights against the states. And in each case, its reason for doing this was that the right involved was "fundamental."


Hmmm ... Maybe it's just me. But I'm just wondering how one would go about determining that a right is not fundamental? I mean, a right is a right, not a privilege. What is it about a right that could make it anything _but_ fundamental?

The Constitution doesn't grant _any_ rights. It just recognizes them and sets them above arbitrary laws and capricious rulings.
 TheLimey
Joined: 2/24/2008
Msg: 31
view profile
History
HUGE victory in California today for the rights of gun owners :)
Posted: 4/28/2009 10:32:57 PM

You can read the info and see the DoD letter to Georgia Arms here:
The Shootist Site:
http://www.theshootist.net
FYI FOLKS
This came from GA-VHPA group. (Georgia Vietnam Helicopter Pilots Association)
Save your brass! It has begun!

Barack 0bama is on track to eliminate shooting hobbies, even if it breaks the Country. To all of you who voted for him........sooner or later he'll get around to something that affects YOU.

This is breaking news....

Georgia Arms is the 5th largest retailer of .223 Ammo in America . (they sell 9 mm, 45, etc) They normally buy spent brass from the US Dept of Defense - 'one time used' shell casings by our Military - from training on Military bases, etc. They buy the brass And then re-load for resale to Law Enforcement, Gun Shops, Gun Clubs, etc. They normally buy 30,000 lbs of spent brass at a time.

This week the DoD wrote a letter to the owner of Georgia Arms and said that from now on the DoD will be destroying the brass - shredding it. It is no longer available to the Ammo makers - unless they just buy it in a scrap condition (which they have no use for). By The Way - The brass is NOW going to be sold by the DoD to China as scrap - for less money than Ammo manufacturers have been paying for the shells before processing to destroy. That sure helps the US economy now, doesn't it? Sell cheaper to China - and do not sell shells at all to a proven US business. Any agenda working here?

The Georgia Arms owner even related a story that one of his competitors had already purchased a load of brass last week - and the DoD contacted him this week and said they were sending someone over to make sure it was destroyed. Shell Casings he had already bought! THE BRASS HAS NO VALUE TO THE AMMO MAKER IF IT IS DESTROYED/SHREDDED/MELTED. HE ONLY USES IT TO RELOAD DIFFERENT CALIBERS - MAINLY 223 BULLETS.

Georgia Arms owner says that he will have to lay off at least Half of his 60 workers, within 2 - 3 months if the DoD no longer sells their spent brass to him. He has 2 - 3 months inventory of shells to use. By summer - he's out.


Thats about 2 months out of date, they overturned the scrap brass deal.
 matchlight
Joined: 1/31/2009
Msg: 32
view profile
History
HUGE victory in California today for the rights of gun owners :)
Posted: 4/29/2009 2:26:02 AM

The Constitution doesn't grant _any_ rights. It just recognizes them and sets them above arbitrary laws and capricious rulings


Warning: The following may contain legal stuff. Those who think the law is whatever they feel it ought to be may want to avert their eyes.

You're right, in the sense that the people granted some of their natural rights to the states, which in turn--through the Constitution-- delegated some of these rights to the United States. I was just using "grant" to make the distinction Chief Justice Waite made in U.S. v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1875).

He rejected the argument that the right to keep and bear arms was one of the "privileges and immunities of United States citizenship" protected by the 14th Am., saying that "it is not a right granted by the Constitution . . . . The Second Amendment declares that it shall not be infringed, but this . . . means no more than that it shall not be infringed by Congress. This is one of the amendments that has no other effect than to restrict the powers of the National government."

(The strongest support for the argument that the right to keep and bear arms is a "privilege and immunity of United States citizenship" is--of all things--Chief Justice Taney's opinion in Dred Scott v. Sandford. He reasoned that because it was inconceivable that the framers would have given blacks the right to keep arms, they didn't envision them as citizens.)

The Court has used certain standards to determine whether a constitutional right is "fundamental," and state laws that step on rights they've crowned as "fundamental" don't stand a snowball's chance in he!!. Tens of thousands of pages have been written about theories of fundamental rights. For anyone who's interested in what's involved, a good place to start is Justice Harlan's dissenting opinion in Poe v. Ullman, 367 U.S. 497 (1961).

Civics alert: The rights enumerated in the Constitution don't just trump arbitrary laws--they trump *all* other laws.
 AceOfSpace
Joined: 5/28/2007
Msg: 33
HUGE victory in California today for the rights of gun owners :)
Posted: 4/29/2009 9:08:29 AM

Civics alert: The rights enumerated in the Constitution don't just trump arbitrary laws--they trump *all* other laws.


Exactly.

The only legitimate check on my free exercise of any of my rights is when my doing so would infringe on one of yours. Legitimate laws simply recognize and resolve those conflicts.

If, by "fundamental," the Courts mean a right that cannot be waived (or delegated to a state), I can understand that. In that sense, property rights do not necessarily have the same urgency as the right to due process. Otherwise, no one could ever settle claims for damages without going to trial!

Near as I can tell, the only legitimate governmental interest in gun ownership has to do with public safety. I can see laws that mandate safe storage, legal discharge, and that restrict ownership to persons who are presumed to be capable of complying with those laws (e.g., competent adults with no criminal record).

Sadly, I can also see laws that assign liability for harm caused by weapons that have been stolen. Why? Because if you don't have enough goddam sense to keep your guns secured and some creep shoots a cop with _your_ gun, who the hell do you think should be held accountable for that wayward gun? You know that a gun is a sweet target for theives, and how dangerous it is in criminal hands. So keep you guns locked up when you aren't home to personally keep an eye on them!!!! Or ... pay up!!!!

If I leave my car parked on a hill, out of gear, and with the parking brake off, I should know that it's likely to get away from me and cause serious harm. Same thing with an unsecured gun.

Now, if we could get all these cops who are trying to destroy the market for recreational drugs off of that impossible task and onto the remainder of violent crimes that legalization can't prevent, we'd all be so much safer. The cops might actually be able to respond to other calls--such as those battered women whose abusers ignore restraining orders!
 AceOfSpace
Joined: 5/28/2007
Msg: 34
HUGE victory in California today for the rights of gun owners :)
Posted: 4/29/2009 12:04:52 PM
If someone steals your car (its parked on the street) and kills a pedestrian while driving, are you responsible?


Not if I took reasonable precautions to secure the car, given the inherent level of lethality that a car is generally understood to have. But if I left it unlocked and running, I'll bet that most any jury would hold me at least partially liable. Wouldn't you?


If you are having a party and a guest takes one of your unlocked steak knives and kills someone are you responsible?


Given the low likelihood that a steakknife would be used that way, I doubt it. Killing people is, after all, not it's primary intended function. But tell me, what is the primary purpose of a gun in the house if not to put down bad guys?

As an aside, do you know why your Chinese food always comes out of the kitchen in bite-sized chunks and the utensils they give you make for such lousy weapons? Yep, that's right. 3,000 years of continuous civilization has taught them something.


BTW the last things legal gun owners want is to lose a gun due to theft. Firearms are fairly expensive items and most owners develop an attachment to them that precludes leaving them lying around.


Good! I should hope so. In that case, a law that mandates proper storage and due care shouldn't be a problem. However, what about those criminals who got their guns cheap and really don't give a rap? If it would help get _them_ off the street before they hurt someone, what would be so wrong with that?


PBS which is about as ANTI gun as it gets states:

Responding to a question of how they obtained their most recent handgun, the arrestees answered as follows: 56% said they paid cash; 15% said it was a gift; 10% said they borrowed it; 8% said they traded for it; while 5% only said that they stole it.


Pfft. Why would anyone admit to stealing a gun--especially if they did? I would think that most burglars would simply sell any extra guns they come across for cash. So what percentage of those who claimed to pay cash were actually in possession of a stolen weapon? Your guess is as good as mine--but I'd guess high. Wouldn't you?

For the most part you make a very good case, and I've had to think hard to respond to you. But this one was just too easy--not at all up to your usual standards!
 TheLimey
Joined: 2/24/2008
Msg: 35
view profile
History
HUGE victory in California today for the rights of gun owners :)
Posted: 4/29/2009 3:05:50 PM

But tell me, what is the primary purpose of a gun in the house if not to put down bad guys?

Hunting & target shooting....
 vendie
Joined: 3/8/2009
Msg: 36
HUGE victory in California today for the rights of gun owners :)
Posted: 4/29/2009 4:17:35 PM
I taught my daughter to shoot, just like I was taught, she was taught with a M-1 carbine, when she went into the Navy, she earned a ribbon for Markmanship in basic training. She has been shooting guns for over 10 years now, I don't hunt, I just shoot targets. I have several guns, including a AR-15 and have stocked up on ammo like most have after Obama went into office.
I truely feel most of these people are idiots, most guns laws are not going to be followed by people that don't follow the law, period!
If someone uses a gun in a criminal act, put them away, if someone does anything illegal with a gun, put them away. These same people cry wolf to Senators like Diane Feinstein, that **** is against guns, but has a weapons carry permit for San Francisco, something an ordinary citizen can't get, go figure!
 matchlight
Joined: 1/31/2009
Msg: 37
view profile
History
HUGE victory in California today for the rights of gun owners :)
Posted: 4/29/2009 4:21:56 PM

If, by "fundamental," the Courts mean a right that cannot be waived (or delegated to a state)


That's not quite what the "fundamental" analysis is about, but I'll let the Court explain it. Due process is a pretty vague concept, and it depends a lot on context. Justice Frankfurter said once that due process is just the process that's due. And sometimes, a person's not due very much. A lot of Supreme Court decisions have a section that explains all about almost any subject there is in law. Almost like textbooks. The only trick is to find the cases that have the best explanations of whatever subject you want to know about.

As for property rights, the whole Substantive Due Process era, starting with Lochner in 1904 and ending with West Coast Hotel in 1937, was all about the Court defending property rights against laws Congress enacted. And the Court (more than 200 times) held that one or another of these federal laws deprived someone of their property without due process of law. The Court traditionally defended property rights as strongly as any, including First Am. rights. (BTW, Dred Scott's the first SDP case--and it paved the way to the Civil War. Roe--the best-known decision of the "Second SDP era"--is the modern version of Dred Scott, but much less well reasoned.)
 TheLimey
Joined: 2/24/2008
Msg: 38
view profile
History
HUGE victory in California today for the rights of gun owners :)
Posted: 4/29/2009 8:03:14 PM

If someone uses a gun in a criminal act, put them away, if someone does anything illegal with a gun, put them away. These same people cry wolf to Senators like Diane Feinstein, that **** is against guns, but has a weapons carry permit for San Francisco, something an ordinary citizen can't get, go figure!

She gave that up quite a few years ago.. not needed when she has armed bodyguards ;)
 AceOfSpace
Joined: 5/28/2007
Msg: 39
HUGE victory in California today for the rights of gun owners :)
Posted: 4/29/2009 9:03:55 PM

Hunting & target shooting....


Please. Let's not be disingenuous. A gun in the house ain't there for jackrabbits or skeet, and you know it.
 TheLimey
Joined: 2/24/2008
Msg: 40
view profile
History
HUGE victory in California today for the rights of gun owners :)
Posted: 4/29/2009 9:09:42 PM
Please. Let's not be disingenuous. A gun in the house ain't there for jackrabbits or skeet, and you know it.

Where would you suggest I keep my gunsafe.. in the front yard? Ca DoJ specifies where guns are to be kept & "on the lawn" isn't on that list..
 AceOfSpace
Joined: 5/28/2007
Msg: 41
HUGE victory in California today for the rights of gun owners :)
Posted: 4/29/2009 9:18:32 PM
If it's in your safe when you're not out hunting with it or shooting it at the range, no worries. You can do better than to pick petty nits. Can't you?
 fzrhusker
Joined: 10/8/2005
Msg: 42
HUGE victory in California today for the rights of gun owners :)
Posted: 4/30/2009 6:39:06 PM
Sorry for an outdated story, but i still believe the attempt at the brass thing has merit to their intentions towards the 2nd.
 TheLimey
Joined: 2/24/2008
Msg: 43
view profile
History
HUGE victory in California today for the rights of gun owners :)
Posted: 4/30/2009 6:41:22 PM
They backed down on destroying the brass when just about every LEO agency in the US pointed out that they rely on reloads BIG time...




If it's in your safe when you're not out hunting with it or shooting it at the range, no worries. You can do better than to pick petty nits. Can't you?

Excuse me? I think you need to go back & read who posted what. I wasn't the dweeb who made a snarky comment about what I do with MY guns.


Sure, I don't think bad guys should have guns... especially automatics... But banning anything only keeps it out of the hands of law abiding people. Bad guys will find a way to get them.

Automatics have been severely retricted since the 1930's. The problem starts when people can't tell a semi automatic from a fully automatic machine gun. You only have to listen to the gun control freaks on TV to realise that they haven't got the first bloody clue what they are talking about. They argue from a position of ignorance & show the entire country what happens when we elect idiots. Unfortunately, there's an awful lot of people who don't realise they are being fed complete BS :)

 TheLimey
Joined: 2/24/2008
Msg: 44
view profile
History
HUGE victory in California today for the rights of gun owners :)
Posted: 4/30/2009 9:23:22 PM
To me, the 2nd amendment is a joke of an arguement for gun rights, because all of the arguements involve outdated guns.(the original guns that had bayonettes attached to them)

So do at least 7 of mine....

The oldest one I have is 91 years old (1918 Enfield) & most of the others are 1938-1945. The only *new* guns I have are a Mossberg 590 & a M&P.40
 AceOfSpace
Joined: 5/28/2007
Msg: 45
HUGE victory in California today for the rights of gun owners :)
Posted: 5/1/2009 12:14:53 AM

I'll quote the great sage Larry the Cable Guy: "If you can blame guns for killing people, then I can blame my pencil for misspelled words."


If all it took was a gentle squeeze to get words out of a pencil, I'd agree.
 sd_matt
Joined: 7/9/2006
Msg: 46
HUGE victory in California today for the rights of gun owners :)
Posted: 5/1/2009 3:09:17 PM
Old Folkie

Still ignoring accountability eh?
 o4
Joined: 4/7/2007
Msg: 47
HUGE victory in California today for the rights of gun owners :)
Posted: 5/2/2009 6:53:43 PM
^ I feel I'm not necessarily certain exactly what you're driving at Chrisk overall, but just to focus on one detail, - - triggers indeed can be set-up to require an unbelievably small amount of pressure to make them fire. [- LOL, I could tell you the story about the FIRST shot I took with my dad's target shooting K-38 (unbelievable!)...it really surprised the heck out of me!, even as experienced as I was by then.....very wisely, that was NOT the first thing he ever allowed me to shoot with].
But even with all that aside, I will still always argue that the mistakes are much more caused by WHO has a firearm in their hand and how well they've been trained more than by any fault of a firearm itself though. Nothing replaces training, responsibility, experience and care.
 AceOfSpace
Joined: 5/28/2007
Msg: 48
HUGE victory in California today for the rights of gun owners :)
Posted: 5/2/2009 9:47:07 PM

If my date finds my concealed weapon...

he'll die with a smile on his face anyways.


What a way to go!
 TheLimey
Joined: 2/24/2008
Msg: 49
view profile
History
HUGE victory in California today for the rights of gun owners :)
Posted: 5/2/2009 11:39:23 PM
I'm going to go kill some steel & paper at A Place To Shoot on Sunday morning, about 10am. Anyone else?
 AceOfSpace
Joined: 5/28/2007
Msg: 50
HUGE victory in California today for the rights of gun owners :)
Posted: 5/3/2009 12:16:05 AM
Been a while since I've shot targets. However I'm booked in the AM. Do have fun though!
Show ALL Forums  > California  > HUGE victory in California today for the rights of gun owners :)