Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
guns
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Babagounj" data-source="post: 3514532" data-attributes="member: 12952"><p><a href="http://reason.com/archives/2018/05/15/california-cities-are-free-to-regulate-g" target="_blank">California Cities Are Free to Regulate Gun Stores Out of Existence</a></p><p></p><p><span style="font-size: 22px"><strong>California Cities Are Free to Regulate Gun Stores Out of Existence</strong></span></p><p><span style="font-size: 18px"><strong>More Second Amendment setbacks in the Golden State when the Supreme Court declines to take a case about city zoning</strong></span></p><p><span style="font-size: 18px"></span></p><p><span style="font-size: 18px"><strong>The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday sent a clear message to millions of gun owners in California: You're living in a Second Amendment-free zone.</strong></span></p><p><span style="font-size: 18px"><strong></strong></span></p><p><span style="font-size: 18px"><strong>In an <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/DocketFiles/html/Public/17-982.html" target="_blank">order</a> on Monday, without explanation or comment, the Court rejected a <a href="https://reason.com/volokh/2018/02/09/can-governments-ban-gun-stores-amicus-br/print" target="_blank">civil rights lawsuit</a> brought by the Calguns Foundation and the Second Amendment Foundation. Those groups had hoped the justices would rule that the Second Amendment continues to apply even in the progressive enclaves of the left coast—and that law-abiding California residents possess the right to buy and sell firearms.</strong></span></p><p><span style="font-size: 18px"><strong></strong></span></p><p><span style="font-size: 18px"><strong>Instead, the Supreme Court declined to hear the case, a decision that underscores its willingness to let California legislators and judges <a href="https://reason.com/archives/2018/05/10/two-new-court-decisions-are-quietly-elim" target="_blank">evade the Second Amendment</a> within the borders of the state.</strong></span></p><p><span style="font-size: 18px"><strong></strong></span></p><p><span style="font-size: 18px"><strong>At least Monday's decision serves one useful purpose: It exposes the federal judiciary's willingness to elevate some constitutional rights over others.</strong></span></p><p><span style="font-size: 18px"><strong></strong></span></p><p><span style="font-size: 18px"><strong>Kilmer, the San Jose attorney representing the gun rights groups against Alameda, says: “The problem with the 9th Circuit’s activism, and the refusal of the Supreme Court to cabin in their abuses, is that the California legislature and local municipalities will feel free to do whatever they want.”</strong></span></p><p><span style="font-size: 18px"><strong></strong></span></p><p><span style="font-size: 18px"><strong>Exactly so: the Second Amendment has been effectively repealed inside California. I suspect that California’s millions of gun owners, who are subject to intrusive new registration requirements starting in July, are beginning to wonder: If federal judges routinely ignore the law, why can’t I?</strong></span></p><p><span style="font-size: 18px"><strong></strong></span></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Babagounj, post: 3514532, member: 12952"] [URL="http://reason.com/archives/2018/05/15/california-cities-are-free-to-regulate-g"]California Cities Are Free to Regulate Gun Stores Out of Existence[/URL] [SIZE=6][B]California Cities Are Free to Regulate Gun Stores Out of Existence[/B][/SIZE] [SIZE=5][B]More Second Amendment setbacks in the Golden State when the Supreme Court declines to take a case about city zoning[/B] [B][/B] [B]The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday sent a clear message to millions of gun owners in California: You're living in a Second Amendment-free zone. In an [URL='https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/DocketFiles/html/Public/17-982.html']order[/URL] on Monday, without explanation or comment, the Court rejected a [URL='https://reason.com/volokh/2018/02/09/can-governments-ban-gun-stores-amicus-br/print']civil rights lawsuit[/URL] brought by the Calguns Foundation and the Second Amendment Foundation. Those groups had hoped the justices would rule that the Second Amendment continues to apply even in the progressive enclaves of the left coast—and that law-abiding California residents possess the right to buy and sell firearms. Instead, the Supreme Court declined to hear the case, a decision that underscores its willingness to let California legislators and judges [URL='https://reason.com/archives/2018/05/10/two-new-court-decisions-are-quietly-elim']evade the Second Amendment[/URL] within the borders of the state. At least Monday's decision serves one useful purpose: It exposes the federal judiciary's willingness to elevate some constitutional rights over others. Kilmer, the San Jose attorney representing the gun rights groups against Alameda, says: “The problem with the 9th Circuit’s activism, and the refusal of the Supreme Court to cabin in their abuses, is that the California legislature and local municipalities will feel free to do whatever they want.” Exactly so: the Second Amendment has been effectively repealed inside California. I suspect that California’s millions of gun owners, who are subject to intrusive new registration requirements starting in July, are beginning to wonder: If federal judges routinely ignore the law, why can’t I? [/B][/SIZE] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
guns
Top
