Federal Court Just Dealt a Major Blow to Anti-Gun Advocates in California

[Bikenut]

So you think responding to a school house bully and raising children is the equivalent of war?

Will the nonsense never end?

People should take note of who it was that broached the subject of parental violence to children... and it certainly wasn't me...

originally posted by nogods
Nope. Bullying the bully exhibits limited intellectual capacity. Like parents who can't think of anyway to discipline their children other than a beating. If we had not developed our intellect beyond those low points we all would have been eaten by the lions and tigers a long time ago.

So apparently it is you who considers bullying the bully as the preferred method for those of limited intellectual capacity of disciplining children. Your own words Sir... I'll merely allow others to make up their own minds as to who is spouting nonsense.

 

[CharlesMorrison]

If my Sheriff had that many options under the law to restrict the free exercise of my God-given rights....

Link Removed
Link Removed

ETA; the above post is of my own free will and in no way should reflect back to the poster that was quoted.
I am solely responsible for the above reply in picture form..


Sent from behind Enemy Lines.

 

[gunnerbob]

Typical ad hominem reply.

People like to proclaim they can discipline their children with violence, and solve anti-social behaviors with violence, even though history and intelligence teaches us otherwise.

Taking such ignorance to tasks is not arrogance, it's education.

When your teacher informed you that 2 + 2 was not 3 did you attack her superior intellectual capacity as arrogance?

Typical elitist reply.

I have never proclaimed violence was the end-all, be-all of disciplines. Spankings have there place, as do time-outs, the removal of toys and privileges and of course, teaching children right from wrong prior to offenses. You assumed what you wanted to to further your argument and place yourself on the next highest pedestal... So sad for you. History and intelligence teaches otherwise? Really, do you actually have substantial proof of this claim? Of course you don't... because it's only your opinion. There's your arrogance, buddy.

That's a terrible example, can you come up with something else more relevant? Education, indeed. You rely so heavily on yours that you have determined that all who differ in opinion from you must be lacking one. This here, again shows your ignorance and arrogance. There's a saying about a kettle and a pot... that applies here. I don't recall ever proclaiming that I or the ways I do things are actually THE only way they should be done, simply that they were my opinion.

I'll say it again, your opinion smells as bad as mine.

 

[CharlesMorrison]

NOGODS.....

Link Removed


Sent from behind Enemy Lines.

 

[Rhino]

As Groucho Marx said, "I refuse to join a club that would have me as a member."

I mean, yeah, I feel a connection to this forum, but I never post with the thought in mind of what anyone else thinks of it, whether member, visitor or lurking "fence-sitter." I fight collectivism in all its individuality-killing forms. I like being independent and refuse to be swayed by group-think. I especially reject, dismiss out of hand, and otherwise oppose taking advice from NY leftists on "how to be" when it comes to advocating for my rights.

I am one who is more interested in delving into the crux of the ruling being discussed here rather than ranting at the gun-grabbers who lost this round, but it sure as heck has nothing to do with what they, or current members, future members or lurkers think of me or the board overall. I appreciate your analysis and going to the trouble of quoting the passages you have Rhino, but I have no interest in pigeonholing anyone around here as either June, Ward, Wally or Beaver Cleaver, and don't feel anyone needs to pigeonhole my, or anyone else's, "behavior" as that of Eddie Haskell either. We're a bunch of participating individuals with varying degrees of strong feelings about a variety of subjects. There's only one person here qualified to "work" on the group's "flaws." I'm content to leave it to him whether or not to guide it into a group-think tank.

Blues

I completely understand. I wasn't suggesting group-think. I was just saying he has a point in the context of our public image and winning over potential fence who may or may not visit here. What deference we give to that is strictly up to personal preference, just as you point out. I'm also skeptical that our threads here would really have all that much impact on the overall fight anyway. In any case, I just wanted to point out the merits of the argument. What weight they have is obviously debatable.

Meh... If a fence-sitter makes up his or her mind about how to feel about firearms ownership from a web forum and not from actual experience with firearms and their owners, as well as some in depth research into the historical precedents of armed citizenry, the benefits thereof and lack of one... they lack something of reasoning power and will likely flip-flop another dozen or so times depending on how many other websites they visit. Either way, I understand what you're saying and do see the perspective... however, what would the dialogue be here without some sort of victory dances that border on immature insults to people who we probably don't know and never will? We'd all just log in and say, "Yay!.... so what's new?". It'd be boring, y'know. IDK, perhaps I'm alone here....?

I didn't say fence sitters were smart. Look who they elected president.

 

[Rhino]

I found a kind of "stream of consciousness" analysis earlier today on a site that I know nothing about, but it does a pretty good job of synopsizing the ruling (I think), so I'm going to share it with y'all.


From: Link Removed, who touts themselves as, "Home of the only lawsuit seeking to restore Loaded Open Carry to California." I didn't poke around to find what case that refers to, but here's what they have to say about the Peruta ruling"



If my Sheriff had that many options under the law to restrict the free exercise of my God-given rights, especially after what many are calling a "major defeat for gun-grabbers in CA," I'd move, which is exactly what I did when I left CA forever 22 years ago.

Oh well, I guess we'll see if this "major victory" really bears any fruit. It sure looks from the analysis I just posted that it's not going to be much, if any, easier to carry anywhere in the state, including San Diego.

Blues

They posted another update.

Update February 14, 2014 - This falls under the category of LMAO. Peruta won because “This is not a case where a plaintiff who is permitted to openly carry a loaded weapon attacks the validity of a state’s concealed-carry rule because he would rather carry secretly.” Instead, Peruta sought to carry a handgun in some manner and did not challenge the California concealed carry law. The SAF/CalGuns lawsuit, Richards v. Prieto on the other hand sought to carry a handgun concealed and challenged parts of California’s concealed carry law. And so yesterday Gura filed a document in his case, which is still pending before the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, attempting to withdraw his challenge to the state law. We should know shortly whether or not he was successful. Here is a link to the document and here is a link to the reply.

Interesting. It would seem that the effect of the Peruta ruling is so limited because he didn't actually challenge the Kalifornia concealed carry law. He only challenged the policy of the Sheriff of San Diego county, so apparently that's all the ruling affects. Pity if that's really the case.

 

[BluesStringer]

When your teacher informed you that 2 + 2 was not 3 did you attack her superior intellectual capacity as arrogance?

Nope, but when she tried to correct my answer of "3" and I said, "Get outta my face you stanky skank!" then she swatted me with a large paddle with 1 1/2" holes drilled in it and I not only got the answer right the next time, I answered meekly, "The answer is 4 Mrs. Whitehead, ma'am." Also I got spanked for the same offense by my mom when I got home. Not with a paddle, just with her bare hand, but she did aim for the welts the holes in the paddle left on my smart-ass.

The above contains a bit of "artistic" license, but I really did get swatted with a paddle with 1 1/2" holes drilled in it while in Mrs. Whitehead's 5th grade class by the Principle, Mr. Irwin, because when I was told by the lunch-monitor-lady that I couldn't trade my Bologna sandwich for Richard Pickett's ham and cheese sandwich, I gave her the retort, "Why not? It's a free country ain't it?"

Pffft. Only took me about 45 more years before I disabused myself completely of that Big Lie brainwashing! I really never gave the many swats I got in school a second thought though.

Blues

 

[Rhino]

For me it was mostly Coach Loper. No holes in the paddle but Coach Loper was a big dude with strong arms. There were other paddlings here and there, but nothing like the coach. None of them ever injured me, and I learned some very valuable lessons that have stood me in very good stead during my life.

 

[Concerned_In_Cali]

I just wonder how long it will take them to rewrite the law to make it harder - with their purpose being to hope for more, long, drawn out court battles that continue to delay the ability of law abiding citizens to carry?

 

[Rhino]

I just wonder how long it will take them to rewrite the law to make it harder - with their purpose being to hope for more, long, drawn out court battles that continue to delay the ability of law abiding citizens to carry?

The court decision doesn't affect the law because the case didn't challenge any law. As explained above, the case apparently only challenged the policy being used by the San Diego County Sheriff to deny concealed carry licenses. So the only thing that will need to be changed as a result of this case is that policy.

 

[BC1]

Typical elitist reply.

I have never proclaimed violence was the end-all, be-all of disciplines. Spankings have there place, as do time-outs, the removal of toys and privileges and of course, teaching children right from wrong prior to offenses. You assumed what you wanted to to further your argument and place yourself on the next highest pedestal... So sad for you. History and intelligence teaches otherwise? Really, do you actually have substantial proof of this claim? Of course you don't... because it's only your opinion. There's your arrogance, buddy.

That's a terrible example, can you come up with something else more relevant? Education, indeed. You rely so heavily on yours that you have determined that all who differ in opinion from you must be lacking one. This here, again shows your ignorance and arrogance. There's a saying about a kettle and a pot... that applies here. I don't recall ever proclaiming that I or the ways I do things are actually THE only way they should be done, simply that they were my opinion.

I'll say it again, your opinion smells as bad as mine.

Sometimes that violence is justified. I often would prefer to let the street handle some problems. Sometimes a bully needs a rap in the mouth.
,
As far as kids we should note that nearly every animal uses force to discipline its young. A brisk shake or a nip usually lets the youngster know he's stepped over the line. Much different than a violent beating though.