Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: How will incorpotation allow for LOC?

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    San Jose, California, USA
    Posts
    121

    Post imported post

    I don't quite understand this, but how will the upcoming Chicago case impact the right to LOC in California?

  2. #2
    Regular Member Ranchero's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    NORCO, California, USA
    Posts
    119

    Post imported post

    I want to see it happen. I want to LOC this spring 2010 here in California. :celebrate
    FREEDOM.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Northern California, USA
    Posts
    109

    Post imported post

    Rusty wrote:
    I don't quite understand this, but how will the upcoming Chicago case impact the right to LOC in California?
    It may not impact it at all. The supreme court will most likely incorporate the 2nd Amendment to the states, but allow for "reasonable" restrictions and regulations. Unless they rule that individuals have a right to carry, we will still be in the same situation.

    This is one of the reasons I reject the "stand down" argument. We shouldn't count on the Supreme Court to do anything.

  4. #4
    Founder's Club Member MudCamper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Sebastopol, California, USA
    Posts
    710

    Post imported post

    Rusty wrote:
    I don't quite understand this, but how will the upcoming Chicago case impact the right to LOC in California?
    It's not going to directly or immediately do so. It will open the door for challenges to what will then be unconstitutional law. California has no RKBA in it's state constitution. And since the US 2A is not incorporated, we do not have that right. Once we do, we can legally challenge laws like 12031.


  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    San Jose, California, USA
    Posts
    121

    Post imported post

    So this is still quite a long haul on this issue.

  6. #6
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Lamma Island, HK
    Posts
    964

    Post imported post

    What McDonald does is allow us to begin fighting the laws in the State of California with the protections forwarded us by the Federal constitution. It may also hopefully start and state the basis of scrutiny that is required to determine whether a law is constitutional.

    It would also allow us to sue in both State and Federal courts under an infringement of the 2nd A and not limit us to the 1st, 4th, 5th, etc.

  7. #7
    Newbie cato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    2,335

    Post imported post

    Rusty wrote:
    So this is still quite a long haul on this issue.
    Yes and no. RKBA litigation is on the fast track with follow up cases filled or in the wings. The dicta in McDonald will help to point the way too. McDonald also allows us to tie up new legislation with injunctions pending a courts deciding it's constitutionality (a la prop 187 from years past). Which is why I don't want UOCers inspiring any new in the next 6 months and am asking for a stand down for now.

Posting Permissions

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