Page 40 of 40 FirstFirst ... 30383940
Results 391 to 397 of 397

Thread: NYSRPA v. Bruen Oral Argument

  1. #391
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Central Front Range, CO
    Quote Originally Posted by 5pins View Post
    Bruen used by a U.S. district court to issue a temporary restraining order against a Colorado city's gun and magazine ban. Notice how the gun rights group is called "far right".

    Judge grants temporary restraining order preventing Superior from enforcing some parts of new gun ordinance

    https://www.9news.com/article/news/l...2-43cd01fc6fef
    Thanks for sharing this.

    Looks like I need to look into RMGO - they may warrant a donation and support.

  2. #392
    Quote Originally Posted by 5pins View Post
    Bruen used by a U.S. district court to issue a temporary restraining order against a Colorado city's gun and magazine ban. Notice how the gun rights group is called "far right".

    Judge grants temporary restraining order preventing Superior from enforcing some parts of new gun ordinance

    https://www.9news.com/article/news/l...2-43cd01fc6fef
    The article says the law bans “trigger activators.” Do residents have to cut off their fingers? Or just tape them together?

  3. #393
    Site Supporter ccmdfd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Southeastern NC
    Quote Originally Posted by 5pins View Post
    Notice how the gun rights group is called "far right"
    Ah, yes.

    They offer laws which are "common sense ", or "mainstream ". We are far right, extremist, on the fringe, zealots.

    They are simply trying to save lives (unless you are an unborn fetus-sorry not trying to get involved with that tar pit but I find it ironic). We are just expressing our toxic masculinity and inherent racism.

  4. #394
    BREAKING: LAPD Stops Enforcement of California’s ‘High Capacity’ Magazine Ban

    https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/br...azine-ban/amp/
    The Los Angeles Police Department has stopped enforcing California’s state law banning “high capacity” magazines, according to an internal LAPD email obtained by the Second Amendment Foundation’s Investigative Journalism Project.
    The email was sent Wednesday morning to all LAPD personnel by Commander Ernest Eskridge, assistant commanding officer of the department’s Detective Bureau.

    Eskridge noted that on June 23, the “United States Supreme Court vacated the ruling in Duncan v. Bonta and remanded the case back to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeal for further consideration in light of its recent decision in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen.”

    Because of this ruling, Eskridge said in the email, all sworn LAPD personnel shall not “investigate, detain or arrest” anyone for possessing a magazine capable of holding more than 10 rounds, unless they are already legally barred from possession ammunition in the state.
    We could isolate Russia totally from the world and maybe they could apply for membership after 2000 years.

  5. #395
    Site Supporter HeavyDuty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Not very bright but does lack ambition
    I now live in an area that is peppered with Army Corps of Engineers dam sites, and our best recreational lake access is on their land - where firearms are prohibited. I’m wondering if we can use Bruen as leverage to change that? I remember surprise when the Obama administration forced the Forest Service to follow the carry laws of the states, so there’s precedent. Some of the people I’ve seen at the beach have been sketchy…
    Ken

    BBI: ...”you better not forget the safe word because shit's about to get weird”...
    revchuck38: ...”mo' ammo is mo' betta' unless you're swimming or on fire.”

  6. #396
    Site Supporter CleverNickname's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    TX
    Quote Originally Posted by HeavyDuty View Post
    I remember surprise when the Obama administration forced the Forest Service to follow the carry laws of the states, so there’s precedent.
    That's not really what happened. Obama wanted a bill that passed that was mainly non-gun-related (IIRC regulating credit card fees and things like that), but a section that allowed carry in National Parks was added. National Park carry didn't matter enough to Obama that he'd veto the whole bill over it, but it's not something that he was looking to have become law either.

  7. #397
    Site Supporter HeavyDuty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Not very bright but does lack ambition
    Quote Originally Posted by CleverNickname View Post
    That's not really what happened. Obama wanted a bill that passed that was mainly non-gun-related (IIRC regulating credit card fees and things like that), but a section that allowed carry in National Parks was added. National Park carry didn't matter enough to Obama that he'd veto the whole bill over it, but it's not something that he was looking to have become law either.
    Thank you for the correction. We can still use it to gain access, I think. After that, post offices…
    Ken

    BBI: ...”you better not forget the safe word because shit's about to get weird”...
    revchuck38: ...”mo' ammo is mo' betta' unless you're swimming or on fire.”

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

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