CA Update: AB962 = CA Appellate Court Upholds Injunction 11/06/13

The background check for each ammo purchase seems ridiculous and expensive for the purchase of small amounts of ammo. I'm sure this will simply result in bulk purchases by those who shoot even moderate amounts or prompt shooters to buy in-person, out-of-state. The smarter ones would purchase from a store a little deeper into a neighboring state and would toss boxes or other material which lists the lot number so as to avoid easy tracing.
 
Not me Jim. I'd keep the boxes. They prove I bought the stuff out of state. Track away, you'll find out it came from Next Door, One State Over.
 
To keep everyone up to date on this case, December 16th, the CA-DOJ filed a petition for review with the CA Supreme Court: http://michellawyers.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/Parker-v.-Calfiornia_Petition-for-Review.pdf

Then on January 10th, the Respondents filed their answer in opposition to review: http://michellawyers.com/wp-content..._Conformed-Answer-to-Petition-for-Review-.pdf

On January 21, the State filed its reply: http://michellawyers.com/wp-content...a_Reply-In-Support-of-Petition-for-Review.pdf

We now wait for a grant or denial of review.
 
Al,
Thank you very much for keeping us up to date on all the on going cases. This section is really the only reason I visit Firing Line these days.
 
Calguns is becoming quite a force

Other states that may be creeping towards nanny statedom might want to take a page from Calguns. A lot of first class minds and contributors involved.
 
This is an NRA Supported Lawsuit

Colt46, to be clear, Calguns has nothing to do with this case. Our firm represents the CRPA Foundation in this lawsuit and the NRA is supporting the case.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top