California Judge Rules Semiautomatic Rifles Not Covered By 2nd Amendment

Welcome to ArizonaShooting.org!

Join today!

Pipedoc said:
it get's worse, now it heads to the 9th circuit court. Nothing good comes out of the 9th circuit SMH

What's worse is those sh!t bags are coming over to AZ and getting into our state government. Then they think the same way.
 
Dogslayer said:
What part of "shall not be infringed" doesn't she understand ? Seems pretty clear to me.

Well if I'm a demorat lawyer I could argue that infringing means, I will not keep you from thinking you have the right to a ball and cap gun.
 
This "judge" is obviously not a judge but just a biased political appointee.
 
Steve_In_29 said:
H47pqUQ.jpg

Don’t give them ideas, there is enough censorship on the internet already.
 
So....
since the state and local police are not federal.... then every semiautomatic Police issued firearm they possess.... NEEDS to be confiscated. By their own damned stupid rules.

But that'll never happen.
 
Wish I could remember his name. A few years ago a Federal Supreme Court judge put the 2A in plain English. He stated that the 2A covers all firearms and that the right to bear arms can not and will not be infringed on.
 
Doc Holliday said:
'Josephine Stanton, an Obama appointee'....Liberal woman, that pretty much says it all right there. Pray that you never have your case assigned to that thing, you'll lose every time.

These judges don't care anymore, they just keep banning everything and hoping something sticks.

Does anyone expect any difference when its a judge in California. Not me. :angry-screaming:
 
the bad laws are ruled on so fast and furious that the inmates can't keep up with them. how can they raise enough money to take them all to court . I think that the system of abuse is so bad that all the laws they have passed need to be removed somehow. Anybody have a few hundred million to contribute ?
 
Back
Top