Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: Open Carry Win in the 9th Circuit - Murphy v. CNMI Government

  1. #1
    Regular Member California Right To Carry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    408

    Thumbs up Open Carry Win in the 9th Circuit - Murphy v. CNMI Government

    A pro se plaintiff managed to do what none of the so called gun-rights groups were able to do. Probably because all of the so called gun-rights groups were so busy trying to uphold prohibitions on Open Carry.

    Plaintiff: Paul Murphy and CNMI
    Case Number: 1:2014cv00026
    Filed: December 24, 2014
    Court: Northern Mariana Islands District Court
    Office: NMI Office
    County: Northern Mariana Islands
    Presiding Judge: Ramona V. Manglona
    Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
    Cause of Action: 28:1343
    Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

    Here is an article on the partial win.

    “Judge Manglona said that when Murphy properly renews his gun license, the CNMI government must return the weapons and ammunition he is entitled to possess consistent with this court decision.

    She granted Murphy’s motion and declared unconstitutional the firearm registration requirement, the ban on rifles in calibers larger than .223, the ban on assault weapons, the ban on transporting operable firearms, and the $1,000 excise tax.

    But Judge Manglona also granted the CNMI government’s motion with respect to the license requirement, the restrictions on storing firearms in the home and the ban on large-capacity magazines.”

    108 – Order on Motion for Summary Judgment

    Link to case page at my website.
    Concealed carry is of no use to me, I don't carry a purse.

    Charles Nichols – President of California Right To Carry
    http://CaliforniaRightToCarry.org

  2. #2
    Regular Member davidmcbeth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,621
    Next time you see Judge Manglona tell the judge that I don't care what the judge thinks regarding my rights.

    Aloha.
    Do not take any postings to be the opinion of the poster .. poster may be posting opinions of others and not necessarily himself ... carry on

    "Filing a notice of trespass with your local, county, state authorities , to keep all town employees off your land, would cut down on the government from interfering or harassing you, at least put you in a little bit stronger legal position" .. chk you local laws (disclaimer)

    If a posting looks like its funny - its meant to be so-

  3. #3
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,336
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Next time you see Judge Manglona tell the judge that I don't care what the judge thinks regarding my rights.

    Aloha.
    Are you advocating or encouraging violation of statutes?
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  4. #4
    Regular Member davidmcbeth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,621
    Quote Originally Posted by utbagpiper View Post
    Are you advocating or encouraging violation of statutes?
    I said that I don't care what a judge says regarding my rights ... a judge cannot change my rights.
    Do not take any postings to be the opinion of the poster .. poster may be posting opinions of others and not necessarily himself ... carry on

    "Filing a notice of trespass with your local, county, state authorities , to keep all town employees off your land, would cut down on the government from interfering or harassing you, at least put you in a little bit stronger legal position" .. chk you local laws (disclaimer)

    If a posting looks like its funny - its meant to be so-

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Eastern Panhandle,WV ,
    Posts
    375
    I don't want to rain on the parade here (the guy basically won on all points where the court wasn't bound by CA9), but NMI will now surely impose some kind of a may issue scheme. Since they kind of seem clueless they may even institute a CCW only law, just like IL and DC.

    Not accurate to say he did something the other gun rights group didn't. This is on par with Moore and Palmer.
    Last edited by press1280; 10-01-2016 at 02:13 PM.

  6. #6
    Regular Member davidmcbeth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,621
    Quote Originally Posted by press1280 View Post
    I don't want to rain on the parade here (the guy basically won on all points where the court wasn't bound by CA9), but NMI will now surely impose some kind of a may issue scheme. Since they kind of seem clueless they may even institute a CCW only law, just like IL and DC.

    Not accurate to say he did something the other gun rights group didn't. This is on par with Moore and Palmer.
    Good points all.
    Do not take any postings to be the opinion of the poster .. poster may be posting opinions of others and not necessarily himself ... carry on

    "Filing a notice of trespass with your local, county, state authorities , to keep all town employees off your land, would cut down on the government from interfering or harassing you, at least put you in a little bit stronger legal position" .. chk you local laws (disclaimer)

    If a posting looks like its funny - its meant to be so-

  7. #7
    Regular Member California Right To Carry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    408
    Quote Originally Posted by press1280 View Post
    I don't want to rain on the parade here (the guy basically won on all points where the court wasn't bound by CA9), but NMI will now surely impose some kind of a may issue scheme. Since they kind of seem clueless they may even institute a CCW only law, just like IL and DC.
    Always a possibility but given that there is only one Federal district court judge for the islands, if the commonwealth bans Open Carry and institutes a concealed carry law in its place then it will be easy to knock down.

    Quote Originally Posted by press1280 View Post
    Not accurate to say he did something the other gun rights group didn't. This is on par with Moore and Palmer.
    Because Illinois and the District of Columbia are located in the commonwealth?

    And to answer your question posted at another forum, No! There is no way this case, or any other appeal can leap frog my California Open Carry appeal and not just because the commonwealth has apparently decided not to appeal the decision.
    Concealed carry is of no use to me, I don't carry a purse.

    Charles Nichols – President of California Right To Carry
    http://CaliforniaRightToCarry.org

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Eastern Panhandle,WV ,
    Posts
    375
    Quote Originally Posted by California Right To Carry View Post
    Always a possibility but given that there is only one Federal district court judge for the islands, if the commonwealth bans Open Carry and institutes a concealed carry law in its place then it will be easy to knock down.



    Because Illinois and the District of Columbia are located in the commonwealth?

    And to answer your question posted at another forum, No! There is no way this case, or any other appeal can leap frog my California Open Carry appeal and not just because the commonwealth has apparently decided not to appeal the decision.
    No, because it's a similar ban on public carry period. Only thing which makes it open carry is Peruta, which wasn't his doing. The heavy lifting will come in when may-issue is instituted and Drake & Woollard will be used as persuasive authority to justify it.

  9. #9
    Regular Member California Right To Carry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    408
    Quote Originally Posted by press1280 View Post
    No, because it's a similar ban on public carry period. Only thing which makes it open carry is Peruta, which wasn't his doing. The heavy lifting will come in when may-issue is instituted and Drake & Woollard will be used as persuasive authority to justify it.
    Repeating something which isn't true doesn't make it true no matter how many times you repeat it.

    The thing which makes it Open Carry is the Second Amendment and the fact that concealed carry does not fall within the scope of the Second Amendment.

    The district court judge in this case cited Drake & Woollard and Kachalsky and Hightower and Masciandaro and...and...and....

    Of all the cases the judge cited she settled on one "This Court finds Moore to be on point and persuasive, and follows its lead here." You know, the 7th Circuit case which said that Illinois could ban concealed carry as per the Heller decision.

    Just because Illinois enacted an unconstitutional ban on Open Carry after the Moore decision struck the first ban down, this does not make the new ban constitutional.
    Concealed carry is of no use to me, I don't carry a purse.

    Charles Nichols – President of California Right To Carry
    http://CaliforniaRightToCarry.org

  10. #10
    Regular Member Freedom1Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Greater Eastside Washington
    Posts
    4,654
    Quote Originally Posted by California Right To Carry View Post
    Repeating something which isn't true doesn't make it true no matter how many times you repeat it.

    The thing which makes it Open Carry is the Second Amendment and the fact that concealed carry does not fall within the scope of the Second Amendment.

    The district court judge in this case cited Drake & Woollard and Kachalsky and Hightower and Masciandaro and...and...and....

    Of all the cases the judge cited she settled on one "This Court finds Moore to be on point and persuasive, and follows its lead here." You know, the 7th Circuit case which said that Illinois could ban concealed carry as per the Heller decision.

    Just because Illinois enacted an unconstitutional ban on Open Carry after the Moore decision struck the first ban down, this does not make the new ban constitutional.
    Oh, like the permit required part to OC in Texas is a clear violation

    Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk
    Provision for free medical attendance and nursing, for clothing, for food, for housing, for the education of children, and a hundred other matters, might with equal propriety be proposed as tending to relieve the employee of mental strain and worry. --- These matters obviously lie outside the orbit of congressional power. (Railroad Retirement Board v Alton Railroad)

  11. #11
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,336
    Quote Originally Posted by California Right To Carry View Post
    Repeating something which isn't true doesn't make it true no matter how many times you repeat it.
    True.

    Quote Originally Posted by California Right To Carry View Post
    The thing which makes it Open Carry is the Second Amendment and the fact that concealed carry does not fall within the scope of the Second Amendment.
    Oh the irony.

    Where, in the language of the 2nd amendment is the RKBA limited to OC only?


    "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

    Visible or discrete don't seem to be mentioned at all and certainly not in relation to exercising the right to keep and bear arms. I guess some infringements are ok for some people.

    Charles
    Last edited by utbagpiper; 10-06-2016 at 05:33 PM.
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  12. #12
    Regular Member Freedom1Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Greater Eastside Washington
    Posts
    4,654
    Quote Originally Posted by utbagpiper View Post
    True.



    Oh the irony.

    Where, in the language of the 2nd amendment is the RKBA limited to OC only?


    "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

    Visible or discrete don't seem to be mentioned at all and certainly not in relation to exercising the right to keep and bear arms. I guess some infringements are ok for some people.

    Charles
    Regulations on how to carry is an infringement.

    Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk
    Provision for free medical attendance and nursing, for clothing, for food, for housing, for the education of children, and a hundred other matters, might with equal propriety be proposed as tending to relieve the employee of mental strain and worry. --- These matters obviously lie outside the orbit of congressional power. (Railroad Retirement Board v Alton Railroad)

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Cherry Tree (Indiana County), Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    1,140
    The real shame is that he was forced to represent himself, sans lawyer, because he couldn't get a single attorney in the CNMI to represent him. What does that say about the legal profession?

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Eastern Panhandle,WV ,
    Posts
    375
    Quote Originally Posted by Statkowski View Post
    The real shame is that he was forced to represent himself, sans lawyer, because he couldn't get a single attorney in the CNMI to represent him. What does that say about the legal profession?
    There aren't any 2A (qualified) attorneys in the CNMI. That's why in the earlier Radich case the lead attorney was from Chicago and was awarded Chicago-based fees because of this.
    I thought I read somewhere Murphy was "supported" by the SAF, who said they were going to file a lawsuit after they won in Radich.

  15. #15
    Regular Member California Right To Carry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    408
    Quote Originally Posted by press1280 View Post
    There aren't any 2A (qualified) attorneys in the CNMI. That's why in the earlier Radich case the lead attorney was from Chicago and was awarded Chicago-based fees because of this.
    I thought I read somewhere Murphy was "supported" by the SAF, who said they were going to file a lawsuit after they won in Radich.
    Yes you did read that. Alan Gottlieb lied. I asked Murphy if he received any financial or legal support from anyone? He said no!

    One doesn't need a qualified attorney in the CNMI. One needs a qualified attorney who can practice in the 9th Circuit which is pretty much any qualified attorney. The only time an attorney needs to be in the CNMI is if there is a motion hearing, which is rare, in which case he can get there by one of those new fangled contraptions called aeroplanes.

    Everything else can be filed online by the attorneys or done over the phone.
    Last edited by California Right To Carry; 10-11-2016 at 10:49 AM.
    Concealed carry is of no use to me, I don't carry a purse.

    Charles Nichols – President of California Right To Carry
    http://CaliforniaRightToCarry.org

  16. #16
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    11,723
    Quote Originally Posted by Freedom1Man View Post
    Regulations on how to carry is an infringement.

    Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk
    true. Also, and most importantly, a prior restraint on the peaceable carry of a firearm (any manner) is the infringement.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

Posting Permissions

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