1. 2aHawaii
  2. General Topics
  3. Legal and Activism
  4. California magazine ban ruling
Print
Pages: 1 [2]

California magazine ban ruling (Read 12539 times)

changemyoil66

Re: Calornia magazine ban ruling
« Reply #20 on: April 05, 2019, 09:11:12 AM »
Quote from: Mdotweber on March 29, 2019, 02:45:46 PM
Now we just need more constitutionist judges appointed to the ninth,then this game really gets rolling.

Trump is working on this an across the nation.  Tons of judges he nominated, but fake news was focused on Kav and such.
Logged

Mdotweber

Re: California magazine ban ruling
« Reply #21 on: April 05, 2019, 09:21:02 AM »
yup the old slight of hand :thumbsup:
Logged
"Dont forget, incoming fire has the right of way"-Clint Smith?

2ahavvaii

Re: California magazine ban ruling
« Reply #22 on: April 05, 2019, 11:51:14 AM »
honestly his biggest accomplismnet this term might be adjusting the makeup of the supreme court and circuit courts.  Though I would like to add that my viewpoint is that these judges should not be "liberal" or "conservative" but uphold the constitution and not pursue their own personal agendas.  The 9th circus is a laughingstock because of how blatantly they ignore the constitution.

The democrats screwed up big time during obama administration when they first decided to use the "nuclear option" to ram obama's liberal justices through the senate.  Mconnell later used this precedent to do the same for supreme court nominations. If another supreme court justice retires, it for sure will set the tone for the supreme court and lower courts for decades to come.  And all of this was for some short term win by obama


Quote
The 9th Circuit is so notorious among congressional Republicans that as recently as the last Congress, they held hearings to consider splitting up the circuit geographically, on the premise its rulings, which once applied to a reported 4 percent of the country, now cover 20 percent of Americans — too much liberal influence, perhaps.

But that’s about to change. Once the president’s current 9th Circuit nominees are confirmed, there will be 12 GOP appointees among the court’s 29 full-time judges with one vacancy left for the president to fill. Almost half of the bench will lean right. Thanks to Trump, the liberal 9th Circuit will be liberal no more.

quote is article by the liberal wapo.  And they're slightly exaggerating/lying because 12/29 is still much less than half.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2019/02/28/thanks-trump-liberal-ninth-circuit-is-no-longer-liberal/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.9ed12444b8d2
« Last Edit: April 05, 2019, 12:03:49 PM by 2ahavvaii »
Logged

punaperson

Re: California magazine ban ruling
« Reply #23 on: April 05, 2019, 12:22:44 PM »
Quote from: 2ahavvaii on April 05, 2019, 11:51:14 AM
quote is article by the liberal wapo.  And they're slightly exaggerating/lying because 12/29 is still much less than half.
Two things: Yeah, the math on that is that the Dem appointees hold a 42% advantage in votes and the odds of being selected to a three judge panel. The other thing is that some of the Repub nominees are either of questionable value to us, or known to be useless. For example Trump appointed former Hawaii AG Mark Bennett. He's no friend of gun rights, or many other rights, as is reflected in the fact that while Hirono was trying to get Kavanaugh to the guillotine, both she and Schatz voted to confirm "Republican" Bennett. You think two of the furthest left members of the Senate voted for some guy who will uphold a Scalia/Thomas/ Alito perspective on the Second Amendment? Garbage.
Logged

Flapp_Jackson

Re: California magazine ban ruling
« Reply #24 on: April 05, 2019, 12:37:04 PM »
Logged
The reasonable man adapts himself to the world;
the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself.
Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man.
-- George Bernard Shaw

changemyoil66

Re: California magazine ban ruling
« Reply #25 on: April 05, 2019, 12:44:34 PM »
"Officer I did not order standard mags from (enter online company).  That box that came in was for a free T-shirt that I won.  All existing mags you may see/find have been bought legally from after the court ruling, but before 5pm today."
Logged

drck1000

Re: California magazine ban ruling
« Reply #26 on: April 05, 2019, 01:26:14 PM »
Have seen and bunch of CA mag sale emails. “Hundo-packs” for prettt good prices. Some seem to have been late to the game though.
Logged

rpoL98

Re: California magazine ban ruling
« Reply #27 on: February 05, 2020, 01:22:53 PM »
given the current proposed 10rd mag law, HB1902, SB 2519, I guess this is the fall-back hope?  status update anybody?
Logged

6716J

Re: California magazine ban ruling
« Reply #28 on: February 05, 2020, 02:04:53 PM »
Quote from: rpoL98 on February 05, 2020, 01:22:53 PM
given the current proposed 10rd mag law, HB1902, SB 2519, I guess this is the fall-back hope?  status update anybody?
https://michellawyers.com/duncan-v-becerra/
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (re Motion for Summary Judgment)
Filing Date   Filing Party   Document Description
1/19/2020   Court   Docket Entry: Notice of Oral Argument on Thursday, April 2, 2020 – 09:00 A.M. – Courtroom 3 – Pasadena CA.
Logged
I'd rather have a bottle in front of me, than a frontal lobotomy.

6716J

Re: California magazine ban ruling
« Reply #29 on: February 10, 2020, 02:41:06 PM »
Investing in 458 SOCOM mags now

Logged
I'd rather have a bottle in front of me, than a frontal lobotomy.

Charles Nichols

Re: California magazine ban ruling
« Reply #30 on: February 12, 2020, 06:00:22 PM »
Quote from: 6716J on February 10, 2020, 02:41:06 PM
Investing in 458 SOCOM mags now



There are millions of morons out there who would believe your post and act on it.  No judge or prosecutor is going to treat a banned magazine as legal because one changed the label anymore than they would treat a Thompson submachine gun as a musical instrument if it is put in a violin case.

Logged

6716J

Re: California magazine ban ruling
« Reply #31 on: February 12, 2020, 06:48:55 PM »
Logged
I'd rather have a bottle in front of me, than a frontal lobotomy.

6716J

Re: California magazine ban ruling
« Reply #32 on: February 12, 2020, 06:56:44 PM »
Quote from: Charles Nichols on February 12, 2020, 06:00:22 PM
There are millions of morons out there who would believe your post and act on it.  No judge or prosecutor is going to treat a banned magazine as legal because one changed the label anymore than they would treat a Thompson submachine gun as a musical instrument if it is put in a violin case.


There are morons out there but it does have a point. You can only put 9 .458 rounds in it... But the other side is you can also put 12 9mm rounds in a 10 round .40 magazine. Does it make it a high capacity magazine?

So if you have a 458 upper and these magazines, would they be high capacity or 10 round maximum? And yes I know if you put any other type of round into it, it would then be a different capacity.

Different calibers that will fit in standard AR magazine and feed.

Double Stack:

.17 Fireball

.17 Remington

.19 Calhoun

.223 Remington

.20 Tactical

.204 Ruger

.25-223

.300-221 Fireball

.300 AAC Blackout

.375 Reaper

5.56 NATO

7mm Whisper

7.62 X 40mm

6 X 45mm

6.5 X 45mm

.257X45mm

Single Stack:

.440 Corbon (Requires mag spacer)

.458 SOCOM

.458 RMW

.50 AE (Requires mag spacer)

.50 GI (Requires mag spacer)

.50 Beowulf (Requires mag spacer)

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk
Logged
I'd rather have a bottle in front of me, than a frontal lobotomy.
Print
Pages: 1 [2]
« previous next »