Absolutely, just like all the phone calls and letters mattered in 2013. Exactly that much.Originally Posted by CavSct1983
Colorado AR-15 Shooters Club Discussion Forums
Welcome to the Colorado AR-15 Shooters Club Discussion Forums.
Welcome to the Colorado AR-15 Shooters Club Discussion Forums.
Absolutely, just like all the phone calls and letters mattered in 2013. Exactly that much.
I think it just keeps coming back to getting a favorable USSC and taking this all the way up like Heller and McDonald. If Miller is going to be ignored then there will need to be a new test for what level of form/function we are allowed to have in a firearm. There certainly isn't equal protection and application of 2A (incorporated against the states/locals) happening right now. The conflict between Denver and Colorado law on mags is a perfect example (which demonstrates the stupidity of the Denver Shitty Council in not squaring this up).
If someone takes this on, I will donate $$$ and it will mean more than phone calls to petty tyrants.
NYSafe Act seven round limit was bounced but (IIRC) a lower court found that 10 rounds was an acceptable limitation. I don't think there is a formal line drawn other than Miller which I think would extend to magazines as parts of firearms that determine if their capability meets firearms in common use by mil and LE.
The misunderstanding of bump stocks would likely result in a ban. I don't see a way around that since Miller codifies NFA as would any subsequence test that incorporates "dangerous and unusual." I don't own any bump stocks but wouldn't be happy to trade them or any other rights.
I read a post this week by a 1911 collector on a 1911 board who lives in NJ. He is worried he will have to ship his collectable WWI/II mags out of state for holding. They are seven rounders (for you heathens who don't know 1911s). Yes, even after the NYSafe Act decision they are treating gun owners this way!
So this can, and likely will, get worse.
Always eat the vegans first
NYsafe act has no bearing on what jersey does.NJ just became worse with the new gov'nr who wants to mirror CA as an east coast progressive enclave
The Great Kazoo's Feedback
"when you're happy you enjoy the melody but, when you're broken you understand the lyrics".
I'm trying to find it, but the CA voter mag ban has been challenged and has been halted by the judge. The gun collective did a legal brief. It could have serious implications against the anti gunners if up held, especially if it goes to the USSC. Could undo all mag and gun type bans.
Don't be obtuse. It was a general question as to how the city expects people to comply. How exactly are you supposed to destroy a mag? We are talking the general population here. Give them to the cops? The law is hot as soon as the mayor signs it, so sure- take them to the cops, what is to say they won't just arrest you. They sure could. There is no safe harbor or other clause to prevent it.
What I was trying to show is that this law is badly conceived and implemented. Mainly in the idea of a injunctive action to prevent its enforcement. From there, you use that basis as a way to start a case.
From what I understand, you'd have to prevail going to the federal level to get past all the dem judges in Colorado to get a fair hearing to get this whole thing looked at. You are talking big money.
I thought the relevant case was McDonald (v. Chicago?). That is at least in our favor, we'd have to reverse Miller, or more accurately, get it clarified.
I don't think getting the Pope to sign it will help.
I'm putting together a marketing/protest plan together to start putting pressure on the grabbers. We need to change the focus from the guns to the actual violence. The concept is to apply pressure to the grabbers and change middle of the road people to realize that gun/mag focus isn't effective. But more importantly that every time they limbo for a lower mag limit, they are wasting an opportunity to actually make us safer. The deaths in the meantime are on their hands. Defending our rights isn't going to cut it, we have to exact a political and social cost on these people. We need a message that is positive to protecting our rights, and actually making us safer.
Last edited by FromMyColdDeadHand; 01-23-2018 at 21:53.
I'll stop buying black rifles when my wife stops buying black shoes.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=PLj...xk&mode=NORMAL
If a 17 rounder was legal prior to the action of the DCC, how can they deprive the owner of their property without due process (14th Amendment)?
Liberals never met a slippery slope they didn't grease.
-Me
I wish technology solved people issues. It seems to just reveal them.
-Also Me
The video is more than six months old, any knowledge or links as to where the process is currently?
It needs to have the magazine ban in there too.
Who are you to want to escape a thugs bullet? That is only a personal prejudice, ( Atlas Shrugged)
"Those that don't watch the old media are uninformed, those that do watch the old media are misinformed." - Mark Twain
That has been my point about it be a taking and that the law is 'hot' as soon as the mayor signs it. To me, a preliminary injunction is a slam dunk. Going past that legally is a big question, but a preliminary injunction would be a start to putting a viable response in place. Even if it is denied, it would highlight the craziness of the law.
I'll stop buying black rifles when my wife stops buying black shoes.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote