I thought Miss Murphy did an outstanding job of clearly and forcefully articulating the common use argument. Some of the questions from the liberal justices reveal their incredible ignorance and bias on this constitutional right. I like the record that this oral argument has added to this case.
The record check occurs annually or bi-annually or whatever. One could be the target of a warrant in between renewals. A record check would catch that.
Sounds like it won on a straight ‘common use’ basis. I would definitely expect a call for en banc. But it is a a clear, strong opinion based on commonality, therefore unconstitutionality. It wouldn’t be the first to be overturned with tortured reasoning.
If someone were to say, have a firearm and his or her hand, but was not threatening anyone or acting aggressively , I would not necessarily be justified in using the firearm, but if I wait until it’s pointed at me to draw, then it’s a bit late, no?
If someone were to say, have a firearm and his or her hand, but was not threatening anyone or acting aggressively , I would not necessarily be justified in using the firearm, but if I wait until it’s pointed at me to draw, then it’s a bit late, no?
People turn and fire all the time while retreating. My SDPD Lieutenant Brother lost his best buddy in exactly that way, fresh out of the academy, chasing a bad guy without his gun out and the guy whirled and head shot him with a .22.
This.
“At the very least, California's microstamping case should be open and shut of it's absurd, clearly infringing, and obvious denies access to handguns that are recognized as protected in at least 42 other states.”
It makes a mockery of the entire process to my mind. That low hanging...