Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: FPF amicus brief in Teixeira v. County of Alameda gun store zoning dispute

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    11,941

    FPF amicus brief in Teixeira v. County of Alameda gun store zoning dispute

    The conspiracy of ignorance masquerades as common sense. I am responsible for what I write, not for your understanding of it. Gee Zeus, get a grip on 'yourself'!

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,968
    Teixeira vs. County of Alameda challenges a county ordinance that is a de facto ban on the opening of gun stores – in spite of the fact that federal, state, and local laws require people to use licensed gun dealers to lawfully buy, sell, or transfer firearms.

    Earlier this year, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Second Amendment does protect gun stores from laws that amount to a total ban, saying it its opinion that “Our forefathers recognized that the prohibition of commerce in firearms worked to undermine the right to keep and to bear arms.”


    From link above showing basic issues involved....


    Lets assume that the .govs/lizzurds win and this goes cross-country where no gun store exists anymore.

    What would you see as the result?

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    11,941
    You may ass*u*YOU, do not involve me. The road to Hell is paved with what-if hypotheticals.
    The conspiracy of ignorance masquerades as common sense. I am responsible for what I write, not for your understanding of it. Gee Zeus, get a grip on 'yourself'!

Posting Permissions

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