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.
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.
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.”
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.