Suing California?

MAC702 said:

Well, to be fair, he is also a long-time, respected, open carrier and member here, posting information of common interest to many of us here in the Nevada forum.

Click to expand...

Just ignore him like everyone in the CA sub-forum. Oddly enough, the people who pay any attention to him in there are typically non-Californians.

I don't want to get into the realm of personal attacks, so I'll just leave it as, 'There's lots of information available about him, and his small cadre, on the internet'

mjones said:

Just ignore him like everyone in the CA sub-forum. Oddly enough, the people who pay any attention to him in there are typically non-Californians.

I don't want to get into the realm of personal attacks, so I'll just leave it as, 'There's lots of information available about him, and his small cadre, on the internet'

Click to expand...

I and my supporters are well known for defending the Second Amendment right to Open Carry and you are a well known supporter of CalGuns.nuts an organization which has a Federal lawsuit in California, Richards v. Prieto, in which its attorney Alan Gura argued that California can ban Open Carry.

I remarked in the past how curious it is that this site provides a forum for so many opponents of the Second Amendment right to Open Carry.

Your beloved Peruta decision was just cited by a district court to uphold California's roster listing which handguns can be legally sold in the State of California. The Peruta decision, if allowed to stand, can be cited to knock down every Second Amendment challenge in the 9th Circuit. And yet you and your fellow CalGuns/SAF/NRA/CRPA/GOA/GOC/ members applaud the decision?

FYI, There is not now, and never has been a right to concealed carry. Not under the Second Amendment and not under common law:

“If, after an interchange of blows on equal terms, one of the parties, on a sudden, and without any such intention at the commencement of the affray, snatches up a deadly weapon and kills the other party with it, such killing will be only manslaughter. But if a party, under colour of fighting upon equal terms, uses from the beginning of the contest a deadly weapon without the knowledge of the other party, and kills the other party with such weapon; or if, at the beginning of the contest he prepares a deadly weapon, so as to have the power of using it in some part of the contest, and uses it accordingly in the course of the combat, and kills the other party with the weapon; the killing in both these cases will be murder.” Whiteley’s case, 1 Lewin 173 (1829) – Wharton, Francis (1855) A Treatise on the Law of Homicide in the United States, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: Kay & Brother

DON`T TREAD ON ME said:

The recent Mance v. Holder case has changed things a little. It was a case based on "intent" Meaning the plaintiffs did not get arrested, or suffer the usual harm involved in civil cases. That being said a "intent" case could fly. I received a phone call, a couple days ago from a Sacramento based attorney who knows I set up lawsuits. He is looking for Nevada based clients who travel to California, plan on moving there, or are otherwise involved in California (Child visitation?) He has a track record of suing for gun rights, and has had some success. If you are interested in a conference call PM me and I will set one up.

Click to expand...

Thanks for reaching out, PM sent!

California Right To Carry said:

Why are you at an Open Carry website seeking others to join you in a concealed carry lawsuit?

Click to expand...

There are places that open carriers can't carry openly without drawing unwanted attention including malls, casinos, and California. We know that the majority on these forums believe in ALL forms of 2A expression, CC included. It is why there are posts about rifle ammo bans, body armor, etc. It just comes with caring about the 2nd Amendment so damn much.

I never said I was involved in any lawsuit. That was assumed by the guy from CA. I saw a poster in this thread, looking to start a lawsuit of some form, and had been chatting on the phone with an attorney friend of mine who is interested in making a difference. I saw an opportunity to hook up interested party's.

So to the dude from california.... If you know so much about lawsuits and rights and such, why are you not interested in working with the guy who is interested in working with you? You judged me, and passed judgement on the work that has yet to be done before the party's have even met.

I certainly hope that your law cases are thought out more than your pre-judgemental posts are. You have no facts, yet you bash? Sad day for open carry! how divisive.

California Right To Carry said:

I remarked in the past how curious it is that this site provides a forum for so many opponents of the Second Amendment right to Open Carry.

Click to expand...

I've remarked in the past about how stupid it is to support one kind of carry but not another.

It's not HOW you carry that counts, but IF you carry.

California Right To Carry said:

Why are you at an Open Carry website seeking others to join you in a concealed carry lawsuit?

Click to expand...

You still have not pointed out where I stated I was participating in a lawsuit, much less a concealed carry lawsuit. Please Cite the source of your allegations.

DON`T TREAD ON ME said:

You still have not pointed out where I stated I was participating in a lawsuit, much less a concealed carry lawsuit. Please Cite the source of your allegations.

Click to expand...

"Sources" . . ?

"SOURCES"???

He don' need no steeking SOURCES! He's in CALIFORNIA!

Here is the email from the Attorney I received this AM.

I’m looking for plaintiffs from out of state who want to either travel to California or move to California: 1) have a ccw and want to travel into California with their concealed handgun. 2) have California banned semi-automatic rifles and want to travel here and shoot in California, 3) move to California, bringing their ASWs, high cap mags, handguns which are not on California’s safe handgun list.

Click to expand...

I will ask if I should post his contact info, to make things easy.

DON`T TREAD ON ME said:

Here is the email from the Attorney I received this AM.



I will ask if I should post his contact info, to make things easy.

Click to expand...

I'm waiting for my CCW right now, and the other situations don't apply to me unless someone has an "AssaultRifle-15" they want to give me, lol. I live on the northern Nevada/California border in Cold Springs so it would be easy for me to say I want to go there to shoot hicaps. I would never move to California on paper though for any purposes. I'm only a month into the wait in Washoe County, but I'd be willing to pull the trigger right when it comes in the mail considering how often I travel to CA.

I have accidentally crossed borders while packing - it stinks that I can wind up a felon.

California Right To Carry said:

I and my supporters are well known for defending the Second Amendment right to Open Carry and you are a well known supporter of CalGuns.nuts an organization which has a Federal lawsuit in California, Richards v. Prieto, in which its attorney Alan Gura argued that California can ban Open Carry.

I remarked in the past how curious it is that this site provides a forum for so many opponents of the Second Amendment right to Open Carry.

Your beloved Peruta decision was just cited by a district court to uphold California's roster listing which handguns can be legally sold in the State of California. The Peruta decision, if allowed to stand, can be cited to knock down every Second Amendment challenge in the 9th Circuit. And yet you and your fellow CalGuns/SAF/NRA/CRPA/GOA/GOC/ members applaud the decision?

FYI, There is not now, and never has been a right to concealed carry. Not under the Second Amendment and not under common law:

“If, after an interchange of blows on equal terms, one of the parties, on a sudden, and without any such intention at the commencement of the affray, snatches up a deadly weapon and kills the other party with it, such killing will be only manslaughter. But if a party, under colour of fighting upon equal terms, uses from the beginning of the contest a deadly weapon without the knowledge of the other party, and kills the other party with such weapon; or if, at the beginning of the contest he prepares a deadly weapon, so as to have the power of using it in some part of the contest, and uses it accordingly in the course of the combat, and kills the other party with the weapon; the killing in both these cases will be murder.” Whiteley’s case, 1 Lewin 173 (1829) – Wharton, Francis (1855) A Treatise on the Law of Homicide in the United States, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: Kay & Brother

Click to expand...

How do you work that out? Shall not be infringed means just that. One has the Constitutional right to keep and bear arms in any manner they choose whether openly or concealed, provided it does not harm or threaten to harm others. Even that the definition is very narrow. Brandishing would be a threat but carrying openly in a holster is not

The problem is years of illegal rulings wich cannot legally be enforced, which the general population has just yawned at and looked the other way. Noiw we have precedents which are wholly unauthorized, enforced by federal and local police, known for dishonesty, violations of their oath to the constitution and violence