Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Non-Resident California CWP

  1. #1
    Regular Member SargentMac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Vancouver, Washington, United States
    Posts
    100

    Non-Resident California CWP

    Anyone here think that Heller or McDonald are substantial enough to allow a lawsuit against California in hopes of them offering a non-resident CWP? Also wondering what people think California would do if such a case was brought against it.

  2. #2
    Campaign Veteran gogodawgs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Federal Way, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,667
    Quote Originally Posted by SargentMac View Post
    Anyone here think that Heller or McDonald are substantial enough to allow a lawsuit against California in hopes of them offering a non-resident CWP? Also wondering what people think California would do if such a case was brought against it.
    It's already underway. There are several lawsuits across the country. Including Gray's lawsuit in Co.
    Live Free or Die!

  3. #3
    Regular Member SargentMac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Vancouver, Washington, United States
    Posts
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by gogodawgs View Post
    It's already underway. There are several lawsuits across the country. Including Gray's lawsuit in Co.
    Know of any good articles outlining this case?

  4. #4
    Regular Member amlevin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    North of Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,953
    Quote Originally Posted by SargentMac View Post
    Also wondering what people think California would do if such a case was brought against it.
    They would without a doubt vigorously defend against it. Their officials would have to or loose all the support at the ballot box from their liberal voters. You don't think that these legislators and government functionaries make all these laws without support of their constituents, do you? Just remember that most looney ideas strart out in CA and eventually end up as a pain in OUR butts. These morons have to get elected first. THAT's where the problem lies in that CA voters either are too stupid or could care less. Pick one.

    Yeah. California will no doubt fight any attempt to restore their citizen's rights. To do so would diminish the power of those in power.

  5. #5
    Regular Member amlevin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    North of Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,953
    Quote Originally Posted by SargentMac View Post
    Also wondering what people think California would do if such a case was brought against it.
    They would without a doubt vigorously defend against it. Their officials would have to or loose all the support at the ballot box from their liberal voters. You don't think that these legislators and government functionaries make all these laws without support of their constituents, do you? Just remember that most looney ideas strart out in CA and eventually end up as a pain in OUR butts. These morons have to get elected first. THAT's where the problem lies in that CA voters either are too stupid or could care less. Pick one.

    Yeah. California will no doubt fight any attempt to restore their citizen's rights. To do so would diminish the power of those in power.

  6. #6
    Founder's Club Member - Moderator Gray Peterson's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Lynnwood, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,238
    Quote Originally Posted by SargentMac View Post
    Know of any good articles outlining this case?
    Just the man here to answer:

    Peterson v. LaCabe wiki article

    Here ya go. As you can see, Denver is very poorly defending the law's constitutionality, instead relying on procedural misdirection and criticism of my lawyer's briefs, and pointing the finger at the state. My 6/30 response to them makes it clear that they did not defend the law's constitutionality, and asks for a granting of my MSJ and the issuance of the license.

    My case would not be fully binding authority on California's situation unless we make it to the US Supreme Court, it would be persuasive authority, just as the denial of the motion to dismiss in the Peruta's case helped us.

    Denver, CO was specifically targetted as A) I like going there frequently and B) Self defense is codified in the concealed handgun license statute. Makes it difficult for a local issuing authority to say that a CHL is not for self defense purposes. Thus Denver's desperate procedural falsehoods and whining.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,026
    Quote Originally Posted by Gray Peterson View Post
    Just the man here to answer:

    Peterson v. LaCabe wiki article

    Here ya go. As you can see, Denver is very poorly defending the law's constitutionality, instead relying on procedural misdirection and criticism of my lawyer's briefs, and pointing the finger at the state. My 6/30 response to them makes it clear that they did not defend the law's constitutionality, and asks for a granting of my MSJ and the issuance of the license.

    My case would not be fully binding authority on California's situation unless we make it to the US Supreme Court, it would be persuasive authority, just as the denial of the motion to dismiss in the Peruta's case helped us.

    Denver, CO was specifically targetted as A) I like going there frequently and B) Self defense is codified in the concealed handgun license statute. Makes it difficult for a local issuing authority to say that a CHL is not for self defense purposes. Thus Denver's desperate procedural falsehoods and whining.
    Aren't cali and colo both in the ninth circuit? Wouldn't that level of fed court also be binding without going all the way to SCOTUS?

  8. #8
    Regular Member SargentMac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Vancouver, Washington, United States
    Posts
    100
    This forum is my hero.

  9. #9
    Founder's Club Member - Moderator Gray Peterson's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Lynnwood, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,238
    Quote Originally Posted by Phssthpok View Post
    Aren't cali and colo both in the ninth circuit? Wouldn't that level of fed court also be binding without going all the way to SCOTUS?
    Colorado is in tenth circuit.

Posting Permissions

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