Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Nordyke is out

  1. #1
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter bigtoe416's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,748

    Nordyke is out

    Calguns discussion: http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...d.php?t=427991
    PDF opinion: http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastor...2/07-15763.pdf

    Nothing very positive to read as far as I can tell from the CGN thread. Remanded back to district court. Opinion says a regulation must substantially burden on Second Amendment rights in order to infringe. It will be very surprising if the district court determines that prohibiting gun shows on fairgrounds substantially infringes upon the right to keep and bear arms. Not surprised, but still pretty upsetting.

  2. #2
    Accomplished Advocate
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Bedford, Texas, USA
    Posts
    834
    isn't this the same district that determined the may issue system was not unconstitutional since people could still carry open/unloaded? even if not, it sounds like the circuit is going to force alameda/california to either accept guns at gun shows or flat out ban and take the courts to task.

  3. #3
    Newbie cato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    2,335
    Quote Originally Posted by DKSuddeth View Post
    isn't this the same district that determined the may issue system was not unconstitutional since people could still carry open/unloaded?.
    No different court. The Nordykes are being 'allowed' and hinted to rewrite their complaint to address the core right of self defense (if they can or want to) and return to the district court on the 2nd A issue only. They lost on the 1st and 14th A issues which they can appeal if they want to. And nobody is awarded fees.

  4. #4

  5. #5
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter bigtoe416's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,748
    Thanks for the link Cato. Perhaps there is some positive news after all? Ultimately I can't see the Supreme Court agreeing that only substantial burdens will violate the second amendment, but maybe pro-gun cases can earn a few wins off of the current Nordyke decision.

  6. #6

  7. #7
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by bigtoe416 View Post
    Opinion says a regulation must substantially burden on Second Amendment rights in order to infringe.
    Cannot compute, cannot compute!!!!!

    Thats like saying to be labeled a pedophile you must assault at least a dozen children first. Disgusting.

    I am vegetarian because I only eat meat after 6:00 a.m.

    He's not a bigot unless he..........(you get my point)

    Our courts are so full of Benthamites I fear we will never be a "free" people again.

    The Courts are not supposed to define the constitution only determine when laws are unconstitutional.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

Posting Permissions

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