Return to “Ninth Circuit strikes California’s "May Issue"”
They obviously don't know that much about San Antonio.....ELB wrote:OH, THE HORROR!
A commenter suggests that the Ninth Circuit may be interested in taking the right-to-carry-guns decision en banc — i.e., reviewing the case using an 11-judge panel — because
Turning San Francisco into San Antonio is not something any court is going to want to do lightly.
From The Volokh Conspiracy blog.
Bazinga. That there was so full of awesome as to be better than butter-fried bacon.RoyGBiv wrote:Here is a quote from the current Chief Judge of the 9th Circuit..... Quite the opposite of Nannyism...
Remember, the 9th includes not just CA, but also WA, OR, HI, ID, AK, MT, AZ.. A list that includes some of the most pro-2A States.
All too many of the other great tragedies of history—Stalin’s atrocities, the killing fields of Cambodia, the Holocaust, to name but a few—were perpetrated by armed troops against unarmed populations. Many could well have been avoided or mitigated, had the perpetrators known their intended victims were equipped with a rifle and twenty bullets apiece, as the Militia Act required here. See Kleinfeld Dissent at 5997-99. If a few hundred Jewish fighters in the Warsaw Ghetto could hold off the Wehrmacht for almost a month with only a handful of weapons, six million Jews armed with rifles could not so easily have been herded into cattle cars.
My excellent colleagues have forgotten these bitter lessons of history. The prospect of tyranny may not grab the headlines the way vivid stories of gun crime routinely do. But few saw the Third Reich coming until it was too late. The Second Amendment is a doomsday provision, one designed for those exceptionally rare circumstances where all other rights have failed—where the government refuses to stand for reelection and silences those who protest; where courts have lost the courage to oppose, or can find no one to enforce their decrees. However improbable these contingencies may seem today, facing them unprepared is a mistake a free people get to make only once.
Fortunately, the Framers were wise enough to entrench the right of the people to keep and bear arms within our constitutional structure. The purpose and importance of that right was still fresh in their minds, and they spelled it out clearly so it would not be forgotten. Despite the panel’s mighty struggle to erase these words, they remain, and the people themselves can read what they say plainly enough:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
The sheer ponderousness of the panel’s opinion—the mountain of verbiage it must deploy to explain away these fourteen short words of constitutional text—refutes its thesis far more convincingly than anything I might say. The panel’s labored effort to smother the Second Amendment by sheer body weight has all the grace of a sumo wrestler trying to kill a rattlesnake by sitting on it—and is just as likely to succeed.
Alex Kozinski, current Chief Judge of the 9th.
http://keepandbeararms.com/silveira/EnBancOrder.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; page 5
It's "dissent", not "descent". . . . .as in, we descended from people who dissented against the crown.isa268 wrote:RoyGBiv wrote:
Reading some chatter elsewhere that the majority opinion here goes to great length to trash (eviscerate) the conflicting decisions made by the other Circuit Courts (2nd, 3rd & 4th). I'm still slugging my way through the 127 page read between phone calls.
I've skimmed about 27 pages of the Opinion, and 1 page of the descent, lots of herp and derp in the descent. WON'T SOMEONE THINK OF THE CHILDERN!!!
Peruta has taken a long time to wend its way through the courts, but gun advocacy groups were fairly optimistic from the beginning about ultimate success.ELB wrote:I missed this earlier. Good news! Sales of Maalox are up in Sacramento!
More link:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volo ... n-opinion/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volo ... arry-guns/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Actual decision:
Peruta v. County of San Diego (9th Cir. Feb. 13, 2014)