You should stop using other people's accomplishment to inflate your own ego. Your claim that you are the only one who understands what the cases say; REALLY, REALLY?
What have YOU accomplished?
cocked&locked claims to be a lawyer and yet refuses to prove it. Falsely claiming to be a lawyer is a criminal offense.
The specific holding of the en banc panel in Peruta v. San Diego and Richards v. Prieto is that there is no right to carry a weapon concealed in public. Even the plaintiffs' attorneys don't dispute that is the holding of the court and yet the astronaut, I mean self-proclaimed lawyer, cocked&locked is that I don't understand what the "cases" say.
Yes, really.
Folks should take note that not only has cocked&locked not cited even a single case to support his ramblings, he clearly does not understand the central holding of the en banc Peruta/Richards decision which is:
"We hold that the Second Amendment does not preserve
or protect a right of a member of the general public to carry
concealed firearms in public."
Given that the holding of the court occurs on the first page of the opinion (Slip Op., pg 11), this speaks volumes about coked&locked posts.
Those familiar with my case are also aware that, unlike the Peruta/Richards lawsuits, my lawsuit includes an in-home claim. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals is bound by the judicial interpretations of California law, another factoid any real attorney would know, which means for me to lose the court of appeals will have to conclude that the Second Amendment does not apply to one's home.
Guess how many SCOTUS Rule 10 splits that will create, not to mention conflicting directly with the SCOTUS decisions in Heller, McDonald and Caetano. :lol: