Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 117

Thread: Peruta Hearing

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    20

    Peruta Hearing

    Just wanted to see if/who/how many people are planning on going. It was discussed somewhat last Monday night between some members at a meeting, but I didn't catch too much of that conversation.

    I am planning on attending if nothing comes up.

    http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...=349874&page=1
    -Ant

    "There is no crueler tyranny than that which is perpetuated under the shield of law and in the name of justice." -Charles de Montesquieu

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Harrah, Oklahoma
    Posts
    769
    I will definately be there.

  3. #3
    Regular Member Firemark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    445
    Yes Im going. Suit, tie, flag pin. no recording devices but you can have your cell phone, stopped by and asked this morning at front desk. Which is funny cause my cell phone has a recording device on it.
    New to OPEN CARRY? Click here first

    "Gun owners in California in 2011 are like black people in the south in 1955. If you don't understand that then your concepts of fighting for gun rights is just tilting at windmills." Gene Hoffman.

    "Why do you need to carry a gun?" ...Because it not a Bill of Needs, its a Bill of Rights!!

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Harrah, Oklahoma
    Posts
    769
    Btt

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Harrah, Oklahoma
    Posts
    769
    The suggestion was made on CGN to wear a flag pin to show that you are there in support of the RTBA. I will be there in suit and tie, if it still fits and I will be at the Weekly San Diego OC Meet 5 that evening.
    Last edited by chewy352; 11-14-2010 at 04:11 AM.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    San Diego, California, United States
    Posts
    145
    Gundude and i plan to attend as well.

  7. #7
    Regular Member Gundude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Sandy Eggo County
    Posts
    1,691

    Seating

    By the response from both sites, they may need a larger courtroom. They should hold it at Petco Park.
    A citizen may not be required to offer a ―good and substantial reason-- why he should be permitted to exercise his rights. The right‘s existence is all the reason he needs.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Utah, USA
    Posts
    184

    Fun in the courtroom

    I have been looking forward to this. I can't wait to see a packed house. Good luck to Mr. Peruta and to a just decision.

  9. #9
    Regular Member Gundude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Sandy Eggo County
    Posts
    1,691

    For the press.

    If the press shows up....
    "I am proficient with firearms, I am not prohibited from owning a firearm, and personal protection is the good cause."
    Last edited by Gundude; 11-14-2010 at 06:19 PM.
    A citizen may not be required to offer a ―good and substantial reason-- why he should be permitted to exercise his rights. The right‘s existence is all the reason he needs.

  10. #10
    Regular Member Gundude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Sandy Eggo County
    Posts
    1,691
    My suit that I got married in 10 yrs ago still fits.
    neener neener
    A citizen may not be required to offer a ―good and substantial reason-- why he should be permitted to exercise his rights. The right‘s existence is all the reason he needs.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    San Diego, California, United States
    Posts
    145
    Gundude.....grab me a tie......i cant find any.

  12. #12
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter bigtoe416's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,748
    Good luck Ed! I expect a full report from somebody.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    san diego, California, USA
    Posts
    26
    I was there, judge seemed impartial. she will rule in 2-3 weeks

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Central TX
    Posts
    92
    So does that mean this case will be concluded in 2-3 weeks or just another part will be done?

  15. #15
    kittyhawk63
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Gundude View Post
    My suit that I got married in 10 yrs ago still fits.
    neener neener
    I'm still wearing the same size shoes. Does that count?

    btt

  16. #16
    Regular Member Firemark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    445

    Full Report Coming Soon

    Quote Originally Posted by bigtoe416 View Post
    Good luck Ed! I expect a full report from somebody.
    I was present in the courtroom with perhaps 20-30 other CalGunss/Open Carry advocates, I did take notes and will give a full write up probably tomorrow, tonight Ill be meeting with many of the other Peruta summary judgement attendees at a UOC meet up in San Diego to compare notes and recount details. I will then give as much info I can.

    The short readers digest version---Judge slated whole day just for this hearing, which wound up lasting just under 2 hours. She had many questions for both sides. Sheriff Gore was not in attendence although 2 plain clothed deputy looking types were writing notes on defenses side of courtroom removed from the gallery.
    Overall Perutas' team gave a much stronger factual based argument, qutoing case law correctly
    defense relied on misinterpretation of Heller, Macdonald, and used his go to defense of "What about the children".

    Judge closed saying a written decision in 3-4 weeks then corrected and said 3 weeks. Ill get back with you guys tomorrow and give a blow by blow.
    New to OPEN CARRY? Click here first

    "Gun owners in California in 2011 are like black people in the south in 1955. If you don't understand that then your concepts of fighting for gun rights is just tilting at windmills." Gene Hoffman.

    "Why do you need to carry a gun?" ...Because it not a Bill of Needs, its a Bill of Rights!!

  17. #17
    Regular Member Gundude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Sandy Eggo County
    Posts
    1,691
    HELP! I'm lost in Horten Plaza (maze). Found 3 other people who have been lost here for 2 yrs. Puts me in mind of the MTA song by the Kingston Trio.

    "Will he ever return? No, he'll never return. And his fate is still unknown. He is lost forever 'neath the streets of Boston......."
    A citizen may not be required to offer a ―good and substantial reason-- why he should be permitted to exercise his rights. The right‘s existence is all the reason he needs.

  18. #18
    Regular Member Firemark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    445

    Notes from the hearing for sunnary judgement.

    So I got a chance to talk with other people in attendance at the Peruta hearing for summary judgement. I know many of you want to know what happened, I will try and report as close as possible to what was said from my notes, as no recorders were allowed. The judges opening remarks - she wanted to devote a substantial amount of time on such a “wide issue”. There would be no rulings today but a written order would be coming in 3 weeks, so Dec 6th or so.
    Plaintiffs first remarks covered 2A applies to outside the home, and there can not be an out right ban, the concept of heightened scrutiny, “shall not issue” is an infringement of 2A, and that the complaint was amended not to specifically challenge PC 12050.

    Judges question “aren’t you attacking the statute sort of backdoor or around it?, isn’t good cause the root of your argument?”

    Plaintiff –yes but it excludes self defense.

    Judge then stated will review PC 12031, and 12025.
    Plaintiff suggested a book resource “How to own a gun and stay out of jail”
    Also –must have constitutional licensing in place, and right to self defense is a deterrent to crime.

    Judges question “is self defense good cause essentially?”
    Plaintiff- right now there are to many hoops to jump through
    Judges question “public, you mean walking down the street?”
    Plaintiff- we are not challenging sensitive areas.
    Then he went on to describe the Sheriffs backward presumptive cause
    Judges question “good cause mandates documentation?”
    Plaintiff stated the cause as they are described now along with the “Sheriffs honorary reserve” as being in violation of the 14th Amend. (just a quick note the honorary reserve is the Sheriffs non peace officer club where if you donate a substantial amount to the “club” you get preferential treatment for CCW issuance).
    Judges question “what if documentation was not required, would that be constitutional?”
    Plaintiff –no, then cited US v Ligon guidance for strict scrutiny and all cases before Macdonald/Heller didn’t recognize fundamental right.
    Judges Question “do I need to get to strict scrutiny as a standard?”
    Plaintiff- Heller/Macdonald came about because of a categorical denial of rights because no scrutiny was applied, no standard of review.
    Judges Question “Why can’t verification be narrowly tailored? I’ve been working under that theory?”
    Plaintiff- ALL fundamental rights are subject to strict scrutiny, whats the compelling governments’ interest? Is it strictly tailored?
    Judges Question “In summary judgement, what would you want me to do?”
    Plaintiff- Not challenging 12025, county policy must accept 2A as an individual right and self protection is good cause.
    There was a brief discussion regarding right to travel and residency requirements im sure to address the part time residency question. At this point the plaintiff yielded the floor to the defendant.
    Defendants remarks starts off with Heller means only fundamental in the home, referring to section 3 of Heller, scope of right is not unlimited, and that the entire history of Conceal carry laws are Constitutional. He then made a reference to Chandler and compelling govt. interest and the need to revisit the fundamental right.
    Judges question- “they (Plaintiff) are not attacking the statute?”
    Defendant- the 1917 law then would have to throw out good cause.
    Judges question- “12031 (J) are you familiar? Is it relevant here?”
    Defendant- well Open carry allows you to load your firearm and be ready. This entire case just boils down to 3 seconds to UOC draw (in reference to YouTube videos) or throwing out may issue law.
    Judges question- “What is the counties position on “standard”?
    Defendant- Plaintiff really should be challenging 12031, we can’t issue CCW’s to everyone we are a “Border town”. They can go into parks and within 1000 YARDS of schools (yes he said YARDS). And continued on the “what about the children” style of emotional rant.
    Judges question- well as a what if, what if an honest person can’t show good cause?
    Defendant- a very high number of ccw’s are granted in San Diego, there are currently 1234 of them. (Just for reference Connecticut population 3.5 mil, San Diego County 3.1mil….CCW’s SD=1234, Connecticut 150,000+) Connecticut is the other state Peruta owns property in and carries regularly.
    Judges question- “Does strict scrutiny apply?”
    Plaintiff- Intermediate at best.

    At this point the Sheriffs counsel sat down and the Plaintiff again took the floor.
    Judges question- “County says this isn’t a right?”
    Plaintiff- your honor this is the same complaint they made when your honor denied them motion to dismiss, 12025 gave discretion to the sheriff that was VERY wide before Heller/Macdonald, now they are saying this lawsuit says its much to narrow??? Are CCW’s really causing more crime?? (Rhetorical question)
    Judges question- So some counties are shall issue? Some are not? Is their a different standard?
    At this point the judge did something she hadn’t done all trial she spent the next 3 minutes or so during the answer to this question feverishly writing, head down, focused on topic.
    Plaintiff- I stopped writing notes at this point cause I can see this was pivotal, and commented to those around me, Plaintiff did a great job explaining, shall issue vs. may issue states, how each county does not use a standard, how 14th amendment is not followed for equal application, how Sheriffs special honoray reserve is not a police force or Law Enforcement agency but simply a club that gets special treatment, he also discussed how a very small number of the population actually get CCW’s but they have a huge impact on crime levels. Then the best statement of the whole day

    “If 5% OF THE DUCKS SHOOT BACK, “NO ONE” WOULD GO DUCK HUNTING”

    Defendant got floor one last time and reiterated how Heller is limited to the home only, the court needs to strike good cause (self defense) and then the “what about the children” speech again, being a border town, yada, yada, yada.

    Plaintiffs last comments were basically, what will legislature allow? CCW or loaded open carry.

    Judge closed with this is a very important case, both sides are very passionate, Ill have a written decision in 3 weeks.

    So that’s what I have, I tried not to give to much commentary and keep it as much objective as I could. Important to note the Sheriffs lawyer didn’t know the Open carry law, not only did he say 1000 yards from a school but said OC’r can keep the gun on the hip and the “clip” in their pockets.. I look forward to the discussion, apologies for syntax and or spelling errors.
    New to OPEN CARRY? Click here first

    "Gun owners in California in 2011 are like black people in the south in 1955. If you don't understand that then your concepts of fighting for gun rights is just tilting at windmills." Gene Hoffman.

    "Why do you need to carry a gun?" ...Because it not a Bill of Needs, its a Bill of Rights!!

  19. #19
    Regular Member JJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    East Contra Costa County, California, ,
    Posts
    213
    Thanks for the recap Firemark, This is going to be a very loooong 3 weeks.......

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Connecticut USA
    Posts
    1,247
    Firemark,

    Thank you for a very fair and accurate assessment of what took place in court yesterday.

    It's going to be a very long three weeks, but I think the Judge will now take what she heard and use it while reading all the documents filed with the court.

    If she starts by reading her ruling on the motion to dismiss, I don't see her moving away from what was in the ruling.

    I'm sure she will find the facts in the exhibits that were filed under seal.

    With fingers crossed I'd like to thank all who attended the hearing.
    Last edited by Edward Peruta; 11-16-2010 at 06:10 PM.

  21. #21
    Regular Member Gundude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Sandy Eggo County
    Posts
    1,691
    From what I got from the hearing, the SDC attorney was incompetent and uninformed. He didn't know the penal code, couldn't interpret Heller, and ignored McDonald.
    Do the Judges notice this and help them by ignoring their ignorance?
    Do incompetent attorney's win in spite of themselves?
    Is this the best legal mind SDC can afford?
    A citizen may not be required to offer a ―good and substantial reason-- why he should be permitted to exercise his rights. The right‘s existence is all the reason he needs.

  22. #22
    Regular Member Coded-Dude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Roseville
    Posts
    317
    Ed.

    Thank you for using your time and resources to help further our cause(RKBA). Thanks to everyone else who also contributed in some form or fashion. We all eagerly await the outcome. Barring any major setbacks it looks like you have achieved a major break through for all 9th district gun owners whose rights are infringed on a daily basis. There is still much work to be done, but I go home today knowing that there are people out there that still believe in the constitution.
    If guns cause crime.....mine must be defective.

  23. #23
    Regular Member JJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    East Contra Costa County, California, ,
    Posts
    213
    Quote Originally Posted by Coded-Dude View Post
    Ed.

    Thank you for using your time and resources to help further our cause(RKBA). Thanks to everyone else who also contributed in some form or fashion. We all eagerly await the outcome. Barring any major setbacks it looks like you have achieved a major break through for all 9th district gun owners whose rights are infringed on a daily basis. There is still much work to be done, but I go home today knowing that there are people out there that still believe in the constitution.

    +1

  24. #24
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter bigtoe416's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,748
    Thanks firemark for the great play-by-play and thanks to Ed for being brave enough to challenge this unconstitutional behavior. You're a great guy Ed, but I'm sure you know that.

  25. #25
    Regular Member coolusername2007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Temecula, California, USA
    Posts
    1,660
    Good recap Firemark, thanks.

    Ed, you should be proud of what you have done here. I think the writing is on the wall that you (and therefore rest of us) will come out victorious in this matter. I thank you. And I wish there were more like you. I am sure this matter has come at great cost to you and that is not to be glossed over. Your patriotism is an example for the rest of us.

Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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