Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Nordyke V. King 9th Circuit En Banc.
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="vvvvvvv" data-source="post: 1524070" data-attributes="member: 5151"><p><em>Nordyke</em> has been <a href="http://www.altenhofel.com/blog/possible-ninth-circuit-win-gun-rights" target="_blank">sent back</a> to district court. In short, the Alameda County ordinance does not pose a substantial burden to the right to display or sell firearms at a gun show because there are still other avenues available besides county property. However, the Ninth Circuit did recognize that the ordinance has further reaching effects than just gun shows on county property and ordered the district court to allow the Nordykes to amend their case with new facts that the ordinance poses a substantial burden on the right to keep and bear arms for personal defense in light of <em>Heller</em> and <em>McDonald</em> (case was last amended in 2004 prior to those SCOTUS rulings).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="vvvvvvv, post: 1524070, member: 5151"] [I]Nordyke[/I] has been [URL="http://www.altenhofel.com/blog/possible-ninth-circuit-win-gun-rights"]sent back[/URL] to district court. In short, the Alameda County ordinance does not pose a substantial burden to the right to display or sell firearms at a gun show because there are still other avenues available besides county property. However, the Ninth Circuit did recognize that the ordinance has further reaching effects than just gun shows on county property and ordered the district court to allow the Nordykes to amend their case with new facts that the ordinance poses a substantial burden on the right to keep and bear arms for personal defense in light of [I]Heller[/I] and [I]McDonald[/I] (case was last amended in 2004 prior to those SCOTUS rulings). [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Nordyke V. King 9th Circuit En Banc.
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom