[geopyg]

The article in the Seattle Times (copied from the LA Times) says the "appeals court upheld California's 1999 law which prohibits the manufacture, sale or import of weapons including grenade lauchers, semiautomatic pistols with a capacity of more than 10 rounds, semiautomatic RIFLES that CAN use detachable magazines, and guns with barrels that CAN be fitted with silencers."

Okay, I know that my dear old dad's deer rifle (semiauto)that he passed on to me has a detachable magazine (5 shot). I guess that means I don't move to California.

Now I have a question. Can't any barrel be fitted with a silencer?

Now, some other quotes from the article:

"This should drive a stake through the heart of the individual-rights position". Matthew Nosanchuk, senior litigation counsel for the Violence Policy Center in Washington. (Good for him to live in Washington. If he doesn't like violence he's free to live so he can be safe because they have such strong gun laws.)

Now here's more: "The right to keep and bear arms, concluded Judge Reinhardt, is different from owning or possessing them. (Huh?)

Reinhardt also said the Second Amendment was adopted at the urging of individuals who were concerned about the federal goverenment having too much power."


These guys JUST DON'T GET IT!! The scary part is - maybe we're the ones that don't get it. THIS IS THE LAW in California.

[Plutarch]

Now here's more: "The right to keep and bear arms, concluded Judge Reinhardt, is different from owning or possessing them. (Huh?)

The written decision is very interesting. The part where Judge Reinhardt dismisses "keep" as a meaningless throwaway part of the trite phrase "keep and bear" is priceless.