Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: California Attorney General Says Second Amendment Justifies Racist Law

  1. #1
    Regular Member California Right To Carry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    463

    Thumbs up California Attorney General Says Second Amendment Justifies Racist Law

    I am posting this here instead of the California forum because my Open Carry lawsuit will have ramifications in all of the states and territories throughout the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals and possibly throughout the nation.

    Some of you may have been following the progress of my Federal lawsuit to overturn California's 1967 ban on Loaded Open Carry. After the two recent bans on openly carrying unloaded firearms were enacted I amended my lawsuit to challenge those as well.

    Few of you have read the briefs. My lawsuit was not based solely on the Second Amendment, there are Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment claims as well.

    At the forefront of my 14th Amendment claims is an allegation that the sole motivating factor for enacting the 1967 ban on Loaded Open Carry was race. Fortunately, the legislative history of former California Penal Code Section 12031, now partly codified as PC 25850, as well as the state archives on the Mulford Act of 1967 (of which PC 12031 was a part) prove the racially discriminatory intent of the legislation. Fortunately as well, the Attorney General's own publications prove that the law is, and has been, disproportionately enforced against minorities by a factor of 3/1. The evidence has been entered into the record and that is all that is needed to overturn the law under the 14th Amendment as it involves a "suspect classification" - race.

    Since California Attorney General Harris did not, and cannot, provide any evidence to rebut the claim, she argued a bizarre interpretation of the Second Amendment in her opposition to my motion for summary judgment:

    "the Founding Fathers championed the Second Amendment, which Nichols invokes as a weapon against allegedly racist laws, to try to legitimize Southern citizen “slave patrols” that terrorized enslaved African-Americans, and thereby to entice Southern states to support the U.S. Constitution....This Court should not overturn either the Second Amendment or what Nichols sees as its antagonist, Section 25850..."

    In short, AG Harris is arguing that the Framers of the Second Amendment intended it to validate racially discriminatory gun laws and therefore overturning the 1967 California Loaded Open Carry ban would be overturning the Second Amendment.

    Fingers crossed in the hope that the hostile district court judge assigned to my case buys into the AG's interpretation of the Second Amendment. It all but guarantees that the US Supreme Court will ultimately agree to hear my case. A favorable decision by the high court would be binding throughout the country and not just in California. Even if the district court doesn't go along with AG Harris' insane interpretation of the Second Amendment, the opening brief of my appeal will begin with the above quote.

    Donations to my Open Carry lawsuit can be made though this page at OpenCarry.org or from my California Right To Carry website here.

    Charles Nichols - President of California Right To Carry

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    The California AG has horrible writing skills. Her use of not/either/or should have been a neither/nor (if she thought both should not be done) or she should have employed a second "not overturn" if she thought one should not be done. I suspect the former, but her language leaves that ambiguous.

    Did she provide any support for her claim? 2A supporters can provide writings from the Framers regarding our claim that the purpose of the 2A was as a bulwark against tyranny.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,147

    Best wishes Charles Nichols

    Best wishes Charles Nichols.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  4. #4
    Regular Member snatale42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Central VA
    Posts
    95
    I'm not a CA resident, but I wish you guys the best. You have a terrible fight to fight over there. Hope you have flyers at every gun shop, range, and club over their. If I get some extra $$$ I'll send you a little just the same.

  5. #5
    Regular Member California Right To Carry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    463
    Quote Originally Posted by snatale42 View Post
    I'm not a CA resident, but I wish you guys the best. You have a terrible fight to fight over there. Hope you have flyers at every gun shop, range, and club over their. If I get some extra $$$ I'll send you a little just the same.
    Much appreciated but I am based in the South Bay of Los Angeles which is almost, but not quite, as bad as New York City. The gun clubs are NRA clubs. The NRA emailed all of their affiliated gun clubs opposing my Open Carry lawsuit. Turner's is "the" gun shop in the South Bay and Turner's opposes Open Carry. There is only one gun range nearby and it does the concealed carry training for the few folks in the county deemed eligible by the police for a concealed carry permit.

  6. #6
    Regular Member MyWifeSaidYes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Logan, OH
    Posts
    1,028
    In Ohio, our state supreme court stated that regulating concealed carry as a 'method of carry' was constitutional because we still had open carry available to us.

    Klein v. Leis, 99 Ohio St.3d 537, 2003-Ohio-4779
    http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/do...-ohio-4779.pdf

    Your state is, um, messed up.

    Good luck fixing it! Seriously!
    ------------------------------------------------------------
    What does a caring, sensitive person feel when they are forced to use a handgun to stop a threat?

    Recoil.

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Actually, we don't have open carry available in our cars, in "school zones," in government buildings, in class D establishments...

    Actual law does not always comport with bench rulings.

  8. #8
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,268
    The CA Ag surely could fine at least one English professor to write her remarks for her. I'm told that CA is rumored to have a few world renowned institutions of "higher learning."

    It seems that the ban applies to all, regardless of race.

    Good luck, Charles Nichols.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •