View Poll Results: I will commit to open carr lawsuit post macdonald.

Voters
18. You may not vote on this poll
  • No

    1 5.56%
  • Yes

    4 22.22%
  • $25

    1 5.56%
  • $50

    4 22.22%
  • $100

    3 16.67%
  • $200

    2 11.11%
  • $500

    1 5.56%
  • $1000

    2 11.11%
  • Whatever it takes

    0 0%
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: UOC ban, counter attack

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Fresno, California, USA
    Posts
    40

    Post imported post

    ,Soon california will ban UOC.

    As I see it, we have at least 1000 people on this forum aone, the issue is how many of us will pony up say 100 dollars to protect our rights.

    100K is seed money and if we do that, others will follow and this should easily swell to 1million or more.

    Of course the big factor is MacDonald, but considering that SAF just filed 18 lawsuits, confifence is very high.

    If someone else has lawsuits going, we can work with them.

    As I see it, we have causes of action under the 1st, 2nd, 9th and 14th amendments and we can bring in a lot of dirt on current ccw practices and state law if needed.

    The actual ban on open carry is racist in origin. The police attitude of being ready to pounce on us means we are a targeted group, if that doesn't spell selective persecution or citizen profiling, what does.

    We probably could narrow so called safety zones why we are at it. The fact that almost every square block of san fran is a GFZ shows how school zones are easily abused.

    Your thoughts guys.


































    The attitude of police agencies towards massive zero tolrance towards

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Lancaster, California, USA
    Posts
    56

    Post imported post

    I know $50 is not much but its a start and i would gladly pay it to protect my rights from those bastards.

  3. #3
    Regular Member demnogis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Orange County, California, USA
    Posts
    912

    Post imported post

    A "RKBA" ballot measure?

    Can't make it like Illinoise's though.
    Gun control isn't about guns -- it is about control.

  4. #4
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter Sons of Liberty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Riverside, California, USA
    Posts
    638

    Post imported post

    No ballot measure. RKBA is a right already expressed in the Constitution. A ballot measure is not necessary. Why do something that is not necessary? The most you can get is what you have now and you stand to lose everything. Not a favorable set of possible outcomes.
    Clinging to God & Guns: The Constitution Restoration Project

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Vista, California, USA
    Posts
    516

    Post imported post

    Like I posted on CGN, I'm not going to change my daily routine for anyone, including the piss-ants in Sacramento.

    In a letter I recieved from my Assemblyman:
    I am a proud supporter of Second Amendment rights. I grew up in an environment of responsible gun ownership and have been a life-long hunter. I am a lifetime member of the National Rifle Association as well as the Safari Club. Second Amendment rights are very important to me and I will act as a staunch defender of these rights during my time in the State Assembly.

    AB 1934 is unnecessary. The longstanding right of Californians to openly carry an unloaded firearm has not resulted in criminal use of those firearms across our
    state. AB 1934 was referred to the Public Safety Committee on April 7th. I am not a member of that committee, but I will oppose AB 1934 and similar bills that undermine our Second Amendment rights when they come before me for a vote in the full Assembly.

    Once again, thank you for taking the time to let me know how you feel about these important issues. Please contact me at assemblymember.garrick@assembly.ca.gov or 760-929-7998 if you have any further comments or questions.

    Sincerely,

    Martin Garrick

    Assemblyman



  6. #6
    Regular Member coolusername2007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Temecula, California, USA
    Posts
    1,660

    Post imported post

    I have not voted in the poll. But I have thought a lot about it. My main reason for not voting in this poll is because a lawsuit may not be needed. If SCOTUS throws us a bone, and declares LOC as the original intent of the 2nd and affirms this position then what lawsuit would be needed?
    "Why should judicial precedent bind the nation if the Constitution itself does not?" -- Mark Levin

Posting Permissions

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