their state government for violating their civil rights regarding illegal gun control? Maybe they have. It would sure seem that it would be ripe for doing so in Virginia, should these Bills actually pass. The governor violated the 2012 law forbidding him from banning guns from the capitol grounds. Of course, the VA Supreme Court already said he could. It would seem we are without law.

Any Red Flag law sure seems to violate your civil rights also.

"WE" is not correct... THEY are without law - and can do whatever THEY want w/o penalty.. WE, however, can do zip chit w/o being cited, imprisoned, jailed, sued and not a damn thing WE can do about it... Until and unless WE take back our rights and make THEM pay, bigly...


Seems??? They're so unconstitutional that it would be laughable if it weren't so despicable..

There have been a few, Its time consuming and expensive. The NYRPA has a list of cases they have been involved with, its quite a few. Remember every one not won is a president for the other side.

This one is at SCOTUS now.
https://www.subscriptlaw.com/blog/ny-rifle-and-pistol-v-nyc


This one went to the US district court but lost
https://www.nysrpa.org/files/SAFE/Halbrook-SAFE-Review.pdf

Bingo!

Of course, on many levels: First Amendment (police raiding someone's home because of political speech that's out of vogue), Second Amendment (infringing on the right of innocent people to keep and bear arms by confiscating them from the owner's home against his will), Fourth Amendment (violating the right to be free from unreasonable seizures, defined as being justified only by probable cause, i.e., probable cause that a crime has been committed, which must be supported by oath or affirmation of same), and the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments (violating the prohibition against the deprivation of property without due process of law).

Thanks.

Just for starters:

Miller v. Becerra, SDCA - Challenging the ban on "assault weapons"
Rhode v. Becerra (Challenge to CA Ammo Sales)
Duncan V Becerra - large cap mags Judge rules 10-round limit unconstitutional
NRA v. San Francisco, NDCA - Lawsuit over terrorist declaration
NRA v Los Angeles - lawsuit over city contractors forced to cut ties with the NRA

The California mag ban is in enbanc review. It was ruled unconstitutional by one judge so we had a week of freedom. The 1 in 30 rule suit was attacked by Gabby Giffords and Everytown and Moms demand action. They filed an amicus brief (friend of the court) and it was thrown out as being partial to the defendants of the suit. This ruling came from a Clinton appointee to the 9th circuit. These things are happening but nobody wants to hear it because California.

Not hearing much at all on true enforcement on some of the restrictions. Mostly, I think they're being ignored by both the populace and the agencies.

Pretty much need an effected party before a case can start through the courts.

I like hearing about it. The problem with all this stuff is, how long has Roberti-Roos been law? Wasn't it passed in the early nineties? So easily twenty years or more of "settled" law that is unconstitutional from the jump and that everybody knew was unconstitutional. There will never be any let up until we hold politicians accountable for passing obviously unconstitutional laws and until we unf u c k the justice system to where stuff will get through it in a timely manner. Shouldn't some people be owed some big money by the government for violating their rights? And as to the "obviously unconstitutional"...it never helps that you didn't know about the law or didn't intend to break it when it's some Joe Sixpack, only when it's the government or Hilary or somebody.

It's being worked on. In the mean time, we are just ignoring the law. NY, for the most part, as not complied.

https://news.wbfo.org/post/safe-act-court-challenges-set-new-year

[quote=noKnees]There have been a few, Its time consuming and expensive. The NYRPA has a list of cases they have been involved with, its quite a few. Remember every one not won is a president for the other side.

Precedent. We don't need no presidents for/on the other side. Just saying Your welkom- the spelling Nazi.

It takes lots of money to file and to sustain a lawsuit regarding firearm rights. Gun owners do not seem willing to contribute all the funds necessary to successfully prosecute a rights suit. In a court of law, we are normally fighting a government entity which has access to in house attorneys and lots of money. I would like to see a law that requires government to refund winning plaintiffs a full refund of litigation costs when the plaintiffs prevail.

They have, and some even won. Others have lost.
They can't sue in VA over the gun laws until the laws are passed and in effect.

CA's magazine ban was ruled unconstitutional not long ago.

CalGuns usually stays on top of the legal aspects of CA gun rights, they know far more and have more resources than the average gun owner.

Join up, maybe it will sway the way you see Californians...or not.

CalGuns