|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
CA: California 'assault weapons' ban repeal should stay, 22 states urge Ninth Circuit
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
A coalition of 22 states on Wednesday announced it has filed a court brief in support of a decision that struck down California’s ban on "assault weapons" – which the liberal state has now appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court.
The coalition, led by Arizona, is urging the Ninth Circuit to uphold a lower court decision to strike down the three-decade ban on the state’s definition of illegal military-style rifles. A federal judge overturned the ban with a permanent injunction earlier this month but has given the state 30 days to appeal -- which it is doing. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(6/17/2021)
|
I agree that to be fair, Benitez properly put a stay on his order....
....but the stay should have been 30 SECONDS, not 30 days. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| Those, who have the command of the arms in a country are masters of the state, and have it in their power to make what revolutions they please. [Thus,] there is no end to observations on the difference between the measures likely to be pursued by a minister backed by a standing army, and those of a court awed by the fear of an armed people. — Aristotle, as quoted by John Trenchard and Water Moyle, An Argument Shewing, That a Standing Army Is Inconsistent with a Free Government, and Absolutely Destructive to the Constitution of the English Monarchy [London, 1697]. |
|
|
