Total Recall.

Status
Not open for further replies.
And BEST of all this law DOESN'T apply to Crimminals, remember the case where a gang banger was caught with a, unregistered assault gun a few years back, and CA tried to prosecute him under the law that said you had to register your assault weapon?

The CA court ruled that this was an unconstitional requirement for a crimminal to incrimminate himself, and violated his 5th ammendment rights to remain silent/ not incrimminate himself. Thus no crimminal can be prosecuted under CA law for failure to comply with this or any other gun control scheme that requires registration or involuntary incrimmination. Law abiding citizens can however be prosecuted under the AW law and this one as well.
Got a cite Master Blaster? I don't believe the above is true.
For a brief period, the Supreme Court held in 1968 (Haynes v. U.S., 390 U.S. 85) that felons were exempt from federal and state laws regarding registration because it violated their Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination. In other words, only people who were not criminals could be prosecuted for failing to register a firearm or found to be in possession of an unregistered firearm. However, in 1971, (U.S. v. Freed, 401 U.S. 601) the Court held that due to changes in the National Firearms Act of 1968 the law no longer violated the 5th Amendment rights of felons.
 
How long do you think that would stand before the FED's stepped in and forced them to sell to CA LEO's?
I'd love to see it come to that point. Not even worth pondering, though.
 
from the standpoint of misery loves company

Love the state, hate the people (present company excepted) :)

I'm actually somewhat jaded as my job has me in coastal CA where the majority of the nuttiness takes place. Head East and inland, and you'd think you were in Texas based on the political discussions you might overhear in a diner. Unfortunately not enough population there to make a difference when voting. :(
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top