Attorney’s with the State of California are meeting with some pushback over their recent testimony before the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals on the state’s one-gun-a-month law.
On Wednesday, Deputy Attorney General Jerry T. Yen attempted to make his case in Nguyen v. Bonta, but some justices on the court seemed skeptical about his claims. In fact, in defending the law, Yen tried to make the case that it was intended to stop straw buyers, but at least one of the judges didn’t find that assertion credible.
“Do arms traffickers buy two at a time?,” asked U.S. Circuit Judge Danielle Forrest. “It seems like no.”
According to Yen, the law is a regulation on when you can own a gun, not if you can do so. But that argument didn’t sit well with Judge Forrest, either.
“It would be absurd to think that a government could say you can only buy one book a month because we want to make sure that you really understand the books you read, or you could only attend one protest a month because, you know, there’s some societal drawbacks from having protests so we want to kind of space those out. People would say that’s absurd,” Forrest said during the proceeding.
Judge John Owens further tore into Yen’s reasoning on one-gun-a-month law by using the scenario of a liquor store owner who might be threatened by a gang both at his business and his home. If the owner wanted two guns but didn’t have any, he would have to buy one, then wait 30 days to buy another. And Owens believes in that case the law would keep him from defending himself under the Second Amendment.
The appeal before the 9th Circuit comes after a U.S. District court ruled the law to be unconstitutional earlier this year. Of course, California is only too happy to spend taxpayer money to continue defending the law.
As the National Rifle Association argued in a brief filed in the case in June: “This Court has twice held that the Second Amendment protects the right to acquire arms. This Court’s prior holdings are supported by Supreme Court precedent. First, the Supreme Court has determined that ‘keep Arms’ in the Amendment’s text means to ‘have weapons,’ and the plain meaning of ‘have’ encompasses the act of acquisition. Second, the Supreme Court has acknowledged that certain rights are implicit in enumerated guarantees. In the Second Amendment context, four Justices have recognized—and none have disagreed—that firearms training is ‘a necessary concomitant’ of the right to keep and bear arms. As this Court, the Third Circuit, and many district courts have recognized, acquiring a firearm must be a necessary concomitant as well.”
The state is also trying to meet the second Bruen standard by arguing that there is historic precedence for limiting gun purchases to one every 30 days. But it’s likely that assertion will fall on deaf ears, too.
As the NRA also pointed out in its brief: “The State argues that a more nuanced analogical approach is required because historically firearms were too laborious to manufacture and too expensive to purchase for firearms to be available for bulk purchase. In fact, firearms were ubiquitous in early America, and affordable enough for every militiaman and many women to be required to purchase one or several firearms. Indeed, newspaper advertisements regularly offered large quantities of firearms for sale.”
Further bolstering that point, the brief continued: “In any event, California does not merely prohibit ‘bulk’ purchases; it prohibits the purchase of even two firearms in one month. Americans commonly purchased multiple firearms in a single transaction in the colonial and founding eras—and no law ever forbade it.”
There are no patriots in the CA government, or any democrat run state for that matter. They all deserve the traitors fate.
“In the Second Amendment context, four Justices have recognized—and none have disagreed—that firearms training is ‘a necessary concomitant’ of the right to keep and bear arms. As this Court, the Third Circuit, and many district courts have recognized, acquiring a firearm must be a necessary concomitant as well.”
First the court applies one book a month logic to the 1st Amendment only to throw it out the window with their concomitant training to own a firearm as if training to own a book is a concomitant…hypocrites.
By the time dumbfuks are through dissecting The Second Amendment and catering to Gun Control busy bodies running around with corncobs stuck up their behinds the 2A will look like an oakland homeless camp.
The problem begins when these idiotic bs arguments start to roll no one has the balls tò inform judges the state is there on the behalf of Gun Control which is an Agenda History Confirms is Rooted in Racism and Genocide. In other words opening and closing arguments should begin and end with Defining Gun Control by its History.
Defending the 2A high ground requires not ever losing sight of the History that Defines Gun Control.
It is an election year. Hence the “encouraging” comments from the notorious Ninth is my jaundiced take.
“See?” they say, “us liberals really do think the 2nd Amendment is slightly more than just a silly piece of parchment. Y’all got nothing to worry about.”
give me a break. there are plenty of gun right supporters behind enemy lines.
And what are they doing???
Answer. Nothing.
The minds of gun owners in california have been completely captured by the (Borg) Left.
To them resistance is futile. They just accept their fate. If you are not willing to fight back on any level. Then you don’t deserve sympathy or outside support.
I hope they enjoy their legal bu.tt S.ex and drugs. They are wonderful distractions.
California is rapidly copying late 1930’s German law. The only difference is the name of the people doing the infringements.
The left no longer exists. Billionaires bought it out and converted it to fascism.
They’re the party of the rich and famous. They even had Elon until they went full brain dead in the last term.
Don’t worry. They’ll try to implement price controls like good commie dictators to try to hide their poor governance. Historic inflation? Too bad. You can’t raise your rent to compensate for that. Commiela says so.
You cannot be wealthy and be a social-lists or a commune-ist. Wealth redistribution is supposed to be their thing.
They may claim this or that but they are old school fascists and we need to stop insulting commies by calling them anything but fascists.
You’re correct. They are fascists. But they have communist/so_shall_list aspirations (just listen to them), and they’re all about riding Marxist theories into power. Plus, commie flows with the name Kamala, so I’m going with that. They’re power hungry wannabe tyrants that embody the worst of the worst.
Commie
Commie
Commie
Kamaleon
Policies come and go
Her stance you never know oooooh
Ha ha ha That’s perfect. (Well maybe a couple more commies thrown in.)
Yeah need to listen to the song again and get the original lyrics down. Figure I will throw it to the more musically inclined over at frogrock or whatever the chans are calling their music project lately.
Ok round two:
Student loans and reparations if you may
If I believe your lies will you pay
I’m a xir with confusion
I”m a xir that doesn’t show
Any traits of dichotomy
M pox comes and goes
It comes and goes
Commie Commie Commie Commie
Kamaleon
Policies come and go
Her stance you never know
Voting is easy just ask Jose
He just bussed in and registered the next day
LOL That last stanza. Now work on your androgynous look, shoot a video, and pump it into the ether. You could be the pop Tom MacDonald.
Lol not even autotune could get me carrying a tune in a bucket and I kinda enjoy being married so that look is out. Just going to file this under free use and see if anyone with talent can have some fun with it.
The major difference between a Socialist system, and a Marxist system is the contol of the means of productioin. In a Socialist model [Nazi Germany] the means of production remain in private hands BUT they are controlled by central state edicts. In a Marxist-Leninist model [USSR] the means of production are owned by the central government, and all production is by edict of that central government. Marxist models have always failed, as do any command economies.
The major difference between a Socialist system, and a Marxist system is the control of the means of production. In a Socialist model [Nazi Germany] the means of production remain in private hands BUT they are controlled by central state edicts. In a Marxist-Leninist model [USSR] the means of production are owned by the central government, and all production is by edict of that central government. Marxist models have always failed, as do any command economies. Outside that fundamental issue, the traits of BOTH Marxist and Fascist systems are remarkably similar.
FYI Wild Bill, the naughty word so_shall_list gets snagged by the moderation system.
The Left, anywhere is immune to name calling as a tactic to cause them to “think again”; Leftists are single-minded.
Republicrats, on the other hand are content to viciously debate the number of angels that can dance on the head of a pin.
Sam it’s why I don’t care what commies think (the true believers don’t and the controllers don’t care) I mock them solely to ridicule and undermine their authority real and imagined and encouraging others to do the same. If it gets others thinking cool but it’s not about making commies think so much as react.
Meanwhile, government, or all branches, and at all levels, can buy as many guns as they like, at taxpayer expense. You and I have to chip in to buy the governor as many guns as he can possibly waste, but can’t buy our own. That’s the perfect socialist world.
Hopefully a quick (relatively speaking) strike against this law as the idea is starting to catch up on the east coast and some precedent would be helpful.
“Hopefully a quick (relatively speaking) strike against”
or maybe a quick strike on the offices of Newsom and Bonta while they occupy them … someone somewhere might think.
Sounds like an idea from the land of Should. Would be nice to see any rebuke for pushing totalitarian ideology through incremental infringements on civil rights but some issues will take longer …… or tragically shorter.
Legislators repeatedly pass sleazy antigun kook laws, and then lawyers of all kinds make $$$$$$$, when said laws are by necessity repeatedly brought into court.
Is there a quid pro quo?
Everyone’s getting rich while pushing left wing ideology. Win-win.
“There was too l-i-t-t-l-e* focus on how trial lawyers funneled 99% of their federal political giving to Democrats and their allies, and how this was fueled by deeply flawed public contracts that were signed in the name of consumers,” Skinner added.
part 1
“There was too l-i-t-t-l-e* attention on how the trial lawyers used their lawsuits to obtain left-wing goals. And there was too l-i-t-t-l-e* attention on the systematic use of flawed and deeply conflicted public contracts with left wing trial lawyers that powered the massive political giving at the expense of consumers and their pocketbooks.”
part 2
*avoiding moderation
Mod system won’t let me post the link. This mod system blows.
Effectively double tax if you like your rights. You fund the lawyers on both sides, to fight laws passed by people who were elected by folks who pay little or no taxes – and people who don’t give a crap how high taxes are, because they have more money than they can spend, and/or they are enriched by tangles of regs…
There oughta be a law!
Dontcha know Rob N Banta will agree with that.
Open to better solutions
Rob Bonta:Filipino-American Nazi.
How many of the lawyer tribe vote for (eg) Banta because they know he will create vast pools of revenue for the tribe?
So….
The 9th Circus Court of Appeals now appears to be concderned about upholding the Second Amendment.
I smell a rat.
the rat is that this decison will get overturned en banc like every other panel decison the upload the right to bear arms
“the rat is that this decison will get overturned en banc…”
I think that’s a given, but any freedom implied by the judges is just a “red flag” for me; something is up with that.
You know the Framers placed no restriction on arms possession, and in point of fact there was NO FEDERAL gun control until 1934 and the FDR Socialists National Firearms Act; and then again in 1968 when the LBJ Socialists passed the Gun Control Act which really put the Federal government into the gun control business.
The Cadaver, [Biden] is wrong when he said private citizens could not own cannon as they could without Federal restriction until 1934. In the framers day folks could own cannon, many cargo ships carried cannon as defense against pirates; and then there were private warships [Privateers] sailing under Letters Of Marque doing commerce raids on the enemy and the Letters kept them out of the ‘Piracy’ category. Even as late as 1941, Bannermans of NY, carried for sale 12lb Napoleon Cannon, and 3 inch Ordnance Rifles [cannon] for $400, complete with limbers [I am looking at the catalog now].
We have let the Statists, anti-Constitutionalists, and tyrant wannabes drive larger, and larger, wedges in our right to arms. Fortunately, the influx of originalist, textualist, and Constitutionalist Justices have finally made inroads on the gun-grabber inferior courts and State governments.
“Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword, because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States.”–Noah Webster, An Examination into the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution (1787).
Good comment. Next time, say So_shall_lists so it isn’t trapped in moderation.
“free stuff” for everyone!!! Including “free” medical marijuana and “free” beer too!
@SAFEupstateFML
“…it’s not about making commies think so much as react.”
Making them react might be useful, but their reactions are so dully bland, and repetitive (“cut and paste”, if you will).
Dimwitocrats and Republicrats are merely two sides of the same coin; one wants absolute power, the other wants to be well though of.
The ones that copy and paste are in the slave class and of little importance. The reactions of the other cast are where relevant lessons can be learned……. actually kinda works for the neocon brand of republicans as well for less obvious reasons. As far as being well thought of…..well McConnell is still relevant somehow so yes to him and related but I am seeing a bit of a change away from that. If it holds great if not back to duck season.
“As far as being well thought of…..well McConnell is still relevant somehow…”
McConnell’s brand is a very powerful force with Republicrats, and unlikely to fade quickly after McConnell is gone. Hence, “Republicrats”.
Am thoroughly convinced there will remain enough influence to ensure the “freedom” groups” fail, even if it means the Repubs are permanently in the political minority.
Republicrats are more interested in remaining in power in the party, than they are obtaining power in the govt. (As demonstrated by their failure to govern, even when they are temporarily in the majority)
No doubt that will be their game plan. We will see if it is practicable with social media and a lot of their supporters ageing out especially when losing is having harsher perceived consequences to the voters. With that said I absolutely expect them to be a problem for the next 40 years even if they do not retain party dominance.
“We will see if it is practicable … when losing is having harsher perceived consequences to the voters.”
Those perceived harsher consequences, may not be perceived at all. So many people (voters), are exhausted by the daily grind of real life, that consequences not experienced directly are of no interest, or consequence in the daily contest. It seems, for a few decades, the only perception the majority have is of those things that benefit, immediately, the individual/family, i.e. the complete capitulation of ldeal to instant gratification.
Hasn’t been the experience even here in NY once you get away from the worst cities but the C.S. Lewis warning of the hollow man is very well taken.
” …the C.S. Lewis warning of the hollow man is very well taken.”
Arrrggghh. C.S. Lewis was an alt-right, facist, nazi, card-carrying member of the KKK, racist, Christian Nationalist mouth piece and extremist MAGA voter.
Yes
That’s great that you’re litigating it in Commiefornia, but now do New Jersey.
The People’s Republic of New Jersey has a one-handgun-a-month rule.
For those of us who want to participate in Cowboy Action Shooting, we have to buy two single-action revolvers, preferably a matched pair like the Ruger Vaquero SASS matched pair that Ruger sells with consecutive serial numbers.
But you can’t buy the SASS matched pair of single-action revolvers if you live in New Jersey.
Why? The law is meant purely to harass law-abiding gun owners, to inconvenience law-abiding gun owners and Cowboy Action Shooting sportsmen, and that’s all it does.
You’ll never fine a murderer who says, “Gee, I was planning on committing a murder, and I wanted to look cool by sticking two guns on my belt, but now I guess I can only carry one gun on my belt this month, so I’ll postpone my murder until next month.”
While it shouldn’t even be necessary I can’t imagine there aren’t at least a few gun stores that could set that up for you somehow.
Comments are closed.