will anti gun states ever set up border checkpoints?

[Yellowfin]

But what you have to take into account, Archie, is that California has little respect for rule of law when it is inconvenient for their agenda. They'll ignore it and go right along with what they please. Sure a court could strike it down, but not until years later and hundreds of thousands of dollars--and all contingent on someone's willingness to stand up for themselves against the leftist machine out here. Not good odds of that. If it stands for as little as 3 years, which would be a very best case scenario because most of the nonsense has stood for a decade or longer already, they've gotten what they want. They honestly don't give a crap. So long as it spites gun owners it goes, no matter what the cost or how grotesquely illegal it is.

I honestly wish I could say that's just me being pessimistic or angry, but looking at the laws, reading the court decisions and AG edicts (opinions that become law), seeing the people who passed them, and talking one on one with the people who have been out here since the beginning of this crap there's really no other logical conclusion that can be drawn.

 

[Wildalaska]

I honestly wish I could say that's just me being pessimistic or angry, but looking at the laws, reading the court decisions and AG edicts (opinions that become law), seeing the people who passed them, and talking one on one with the people who have been out here since the beginning of this crap there's really no other logical conclusion that can be drawn.

There is a place called Federal Court and a concept called in pro per...instead of whinging avail yourself of it....thats the beauty of America, even the little guy can make a difference.

Me, I'm at war with my local cable provider

WildandslowlybutsurelywearemvoingtoaheadAlaska ™

 

[Yellowfin]

Ahem...I should reiterate this even for you, WA: Federal Court here does no good because the same people are running that, too. The feds are used as tools of the anti gun movement just the same. Even if they weren't explicitly slanted against us, they still would have to gather the stones to overturn the Hickman and Silveira decisions, which would be akin to volunteering to be shot out of a battleship's gun. They've had plenty of cases where they could have ruled favorably but they have so consistently adhered to the gospel of garbage this place holds as holy that you'd swear their lives depended on it. So yes, you could take cases to them, but that's like me challenging Tiger Woods to a golf game and betting my car on it--yeah, I could technically do it, but I know the outcome before that even starts. I don't need to actually tee it up to know what is going to happen and I'm not stupid enough to do it anyway.

The Bureau of Unmilitarized Longguns Lagers Spirits Handguns Incendiaries and Tobacco is constantly used to drive out gun shops by pulling FFL's on minor technicalities and harassing the hell out of all the remaining ones by paperwork audits. BECAUSE THE LOCAL ANTI GUN TOADS POINT THEM AT DEALERS AND SAY "DESTROY THEM PLEASE!" The few owners and employees I've talked to--few because there aren't many to be found in our area--said they spend almost 50% of their time on compliance. 50 fuggin percent! Who wants that kind of harassment and what can make that worth it to anyone?! ...But of course that's exactly the idea. If they wanted to do differently they would, but they don't.