You're exactly right, because under the law and case precedent as they stand right now, we don't have any right to "own or possess" firearms.
False. - We have the right to insist that our U.S. Constitutional RKBA's be enforced in Ca. -- to strike down these insane laws.
The politicians have free reign to pass any manner of gun ban and restriction that they like, from the statewide level right down to the towns with one stop light, and free reign to throw us in jail for violating them, and in absence of an individual rights ruling from the SCOTUS or the amendment, that is the prevailing state of affairs in California.
Wrong, - because apparently you think that our U.S. Constitution is not the "law of the land" in CA. It clearly is. Read Art. VI -
If the amendment fails, it will be a clear message to California gun owners that our political opponents would rather see us dead than defending ourselves with a firearm, and that it's time to pull up stakes and move to Nevada or Oregon.
Moving on is not an option to me. It just illustrates your incredible reasoning, imo, - that we are at the mercy of the "prevailing state of affairs". 'We the people', can force the feds & state to cave on these matters, not 'cave in' ourselves.
That's all well and good, but the controlling legal authority as to what the Second Amendment means in California is the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, and unless and until they are overturned by the United States Supreme Court, we are stuck with their interpretation which states that it is a "collective right," and that there is no individual right to own or possess firearms. And without anything in the California Constitution, we are SOL.
Wrong, - because apparently you think that our U.S. Constitution is not the "law of the land" in CA. It clearly is. Read Art. VI.
I know that! You know that! Everyone here knows that! But the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals' opinion on the matter is what makes the difference in Calfornia between exercising our rights and jail time, and they are of the opinion that there is no individual right to own or possess firearms. A bunch of Freepers flapping our gums won't matter one whit to a judge ruling on an unjust firearms law.
Moving on is not an option to me. It just illustrates your incredible reasoning, imo, - that we are at the mercy of the "prevailing state of affairs". 'We the people', can force the feds & state to cave on these matters, not 'cave in' ourselves.
Why in heaven's name do you think I keep posting the link to the California Constitutional Amendment initiative project, if not in an effort to get the state to cave on this matter through the force of the popular vote?
But as far as exercising the right to keep and bear arms, we ARE at the mercy of the current state of affairs: if you possess an AR-15 rifle, the semi-automatic version of the standard-issue military rifle -- a militia rifle -- you can have your freedom taken away, your business bankrupted with legal bills, and your name splashed across newspapers nationwide as a "felon," and unless you've got what it takes and can survive the years that it will take to fight all the way up to the Supreme Court of the United States losing all the way up, and you can convince them to render an individual right ruling, then you're just flat out of luck in California.
The "individual right" argument does not hold any water in any court in California at this point in time. That's why we're trying to change the Constitution!