Link Dump

[visual-link-preview encoded=”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″]

In my state they call 10’s of thousands of rounds “a good start”

[visual-link-preview encoded=”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″]

[visual-link-preview encoded=”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”]

[visual-link-preview encoded=”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”]

[visual-link-preview encoded=”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”]

[visual-link-preview encoded=”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”]

[visual-link-preview encoded=”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”]

[visual-link-preview encoded=”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”]

[visual-link-preview encoded=”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″]

[visual-link-preview encoded=”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”]

Rupp v. Bonta — Part 3 – Revised

This article is a revision of Rupp v. Bonta — Part 3 – UPDATED

I got Duncan v. Bonta mixed up with Rupp v. Bonta and wrote about magazine bans in this case when in fact this case is about semi-auto rifle bans.

You can follow the link to read the original. The only changes made were the announcement at the top. Hopefully this is a little easier to read and has fewer errors in it.

B.L.U.F. Final article analyzing the Rupp v. Bonta case currently before Judge Josephine L. Staton, U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. If this case is appealed, it will go up to the Ninth Circuit court, again.


Status of Case

This case was opened, argued in district court, the district court found for the defendants under intermediate scrutiny, the case was then appealed to the Ninth Circuit. The Appellants(good guys) asked that the case be held pending the outcome of Duncan v. Bonta before the en banc Ninth Circuit court. The Ninth Circuit court then told the parties that they felt this case would be impacted by NYSR&PA v. Bruen and “requested” either of the parties to submit a letter asking the case be held pending Bruen. Both parties responded and the case was held until Bruen was decided.

On 2022-06-28 the Ninth Circuit court vacated and remanded the case back to the district. Judge J Bumatay dissenting: For over a decade, our court has improperly interest-balanced our way around the Second Amendment. The Supreme Court has had enough of it. With a clear legal standard now in hand, we should have ordered supplemental briefing to further this case along. … Order Vacating and Remanding P.2 Internal citations omitted.

The case is expected to be heard some time after 2023-05-26. This is not set in stone. The date might move due to other reasons or either party might coincide.

The state is going to have to run a serious calculus on whether to appeal this case. If the district court rules for the plaintiffs then the “assault weapon” ban for the state of California, as currently written into law, is over but the opinion would have no real weight outside of California.

The state could then pass a different “assault weapon” ban and that ban would have to be challenged. This could go on for an extend period of time. As those cases were heard in district courts, those courts that were anti-gun would cite back to this case and then rule the same way.

If the state thinks the Ninth Circuit will rule for them, they know that the plaintiffs will appeal to the Supreme Court and if the Supreme Court grants cert. they will lose and all “assault weapon” bans around the country are gone. If the Supreme Court does not grant cert. then the California “assault weapons” ban will stay in place and the opinion of the Ninth Circuit court regarding the constitutionality of “assault weapon” bans will apply to 15 different districts across 11 states and territories.

Read More

Why are they arguing outside of Bruen

B.L.U.F. A thought exercise in why the state is producing so many opinions that don’t seem to matter within the bounds of the Bruen opinion. Maybe it is because they are attacking a particular clause in Bruen


There is a classic scene in most cowboy and Indian movies where the new person is with the more experienced person and spots an Indian. The new guy points him out and the grizzled old dude says something like:

If you see him, he wants you to see him. If there is one there are a hundred

The point being that it wasn’t an accident. The Indian wanted to be seen in order to accomplish some strategic or tactical goal.

Much of combat is attempting to get your enemy to misinterpret your actions. If your troops start moving back from the front line and the enemy doesn’t believe that it is because they are pushing you back, they are going to expect a trap. If on the other hand your troops hold as long as they can before retreating, pulling the enemy into ambush, the enemy is more likely to believe they forced the retreat.

As much as we like to call the gun infringers names, like “moron” or “idiot” or “Col. USMC(Ret.) Tucker Stupid”, these are not stupid people. If you believe for one moment that AG Rob Bonta or his people are stupid then you are in for a rude awakening.

These people don’t play to lose unless it is to their advantage.

So if they are presenting huge amounts of what I have called emotional blackmail and items outside of the bounds set forth under Bruen there must be a reason.

Read More

Trying to understand liars

I wasn’t going to write about this but I was trying to understand citations and what was going on.

The footnote is:

Kleck Rebuttal Report, ¶¶7,11 and Deposition of Gary Kleck in Oregon Firearms Federation, Inc., et al., v. Brown, et al., taken on January 25, 2023, 20:22-21:3.
Supplemental Sur-Rebuttal Expert Report of Lucy P. Allen in Support of Defendant

What do the “¶¶” mean? I know that “¶” means paragraph. Found out it means “paragraphs”. Since I miss read the footnote I read that Lucy was linking to paragraphs 7 through 46. That is the entire rebuttal. What was she actually referring to?

Here is the paragraph that had me scratching my head:

Dr. Kleck criticizes the focus of the Allen Report because he claims that the number and impact of public mass shootings in the Allen Report is “trivially tiny” and that the “legislative intent” behind California’s weapons bans is unrelated to these public mass shootings. 6 First, contrary to Dr. Kleck’s assertion, it is my understanding that California passed its first assault weapon ban, the Roberti-Roos Assault Weapons Control Act of 1989, in response to a public mass shooting – the public mass shooting in Stockton, CA. Second, Dr. Kleck’s claim that public mass shootings are “trivially tiny” is based on his claim that “less than 1% of all U.S. murder victims are killed in any kind of mass shooting,” and that public mass shootings are “even tinier.” Dr. Kleck’s implication that the only impact of mass shootings is based on the number of victims killed is misguided. To claim, for example, that the only impact in the Newtown, CT mass shooting was on the 27 children and adults killed ignores the greater impact that mass shootings have had on American society. For example, according to the Department of Education, 98% of public schools in the U.S. now have drills and procedures regarding active shooters. Moreover, the very source cited by Dr. Kleck to support his claim that the list of mass shootings in the Allen Report is “trivially tiny” also states that “[m]ass shootings are arguably one of the worst manifestations of gun violence” and that “the national dialogue on gun violence has been focused on mass public shootings.”
Id. ¶ 8

Hmmm, that sounds pretty bad trivially tiny, we’ll come back to that.

She then goes on to move the goalposts. When we talk about the victims of a shooting, we are always talking about those that were shot or injured at the event. More limiting than that is that we normally exclude those that were injured or shot by friendlies.

This will get twisted a bit by different number crunchers, for example when they include the shoot in the list of victims because he was shot dead by a good guy with a gun, but in general we talk about those that were shot by the shooter, not those shot by the cops.

Lucy wants to use the impact of the mass shooting rather than victims. The impact of the cowards of Uvalidi is huge. It reverberated throughout the world. Children were murdered by some asshole while law enforcement cowarded in the hallways.

It had a huge impact, no doubt about it.

Let’s turn to what Dr. Kleck actually said though before we judge him to harshly for downplaying such horrific incidents.

Allen claims that there is substantial benefit to banning LCMs because a large share of mass shooting involve the use of LCMs (defined herein as magazines holding more than 10 rounds). She is only able to sustain this claim by limiting her analysis to a trivially tiny and unrepresentative subset of mass shootings, public mass shootings. She claims she did this because “it is my understanding that the state of California is concerned about public mass shootings and enacted the challenged laws, in part, to address the problem of public mass shootings” (p. 4). Her “understanding” is both subjective and unsupported by any evidence pertaining to legislative intent behind enactment of California’s ban on LCMs and assault weapons (AWs). Indeed, defense expert Louis Klarevas’ description of California’s legislative intent (Klarevas 2023, p. 23) indicates that concern about mass shootings was not limited to those occurring in public places. The fact that the State of California is concerned about public mass shootings does not mean it is not concerned with all the other shootings that do not fall into this narrow category. Further, Allen’s own statement concedes that California’s assault weapons ban (AWB) was enacted only “in part” to address these kinds of shootings and thus must have also been based on concerns about other kinds of gun violence. Thus, her proffered explanation does not justify her narrow focus. It will be shown later that the narrowness of her focus produces some highly misleading results.
Kleck Rebuttal Report – ¶7

Dr. Kleck isn’t claiming that mass shootings are trivial in anyway. He is stating that Lucy limited her analysis to public mass shootings for some reason. And that the number of public mass shootings compared to all mass shootings is a trivial number.

Dr. Kleck is using language in a very studious and specific manner. He has pulled emotion out of it. He is telling the court what the numbers are and then giving his opinion of what those numbers mean.

Lucy uses the standard 2 and 3 word quote trick. Pulling such small quotes out of context that you can’t tell what the actual meaning was.

And interesting find.

Rupp v. Bonta — Part 3 – UPDATED

This article has being revised. You can read the revision Rupp v. Bonta — Part 3 – Revised. I got Duncan v. Bonta mixed up with Rupp v. Bonta and wrote about magazine bans in this case when in fact this case is about semi-auto rifle bans.

My confusion was increased because sometimes the experts are talking about “assault weapons” and sometimes about number of rounds and it all just got me mixed up.

In addition, I managed to make more than my normal number of wrong and/or missing words plus it looks like my copy and paste lost the first character in some of the quotes.

My apology. The only changes to this article are within this section.

B.L.U.F. Final article analyzing the Rupp v. Bonta case currently before Judge Josephine L. Staton, U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. If this case is appealed, it will go up to the Ninth Circuit court, again.


Status of Case

This case was opened, argued in district court, the district court found for the defendants under intermediate scrutiny, the case was then appealed to the Ninth Circuit. While at the Ninth Circuit the Supreme Court agreed to hear Bruen at which point the plaintiffs(good guys) and defendants(bad guys, state) asked for the case to be held pending Bruen. After Bruen the Ninth Circuit Court vacated and remanded the case back to the district court, where it is now proceeding.

The case is expected to be heard some time after 2023-05-26. This is not set in stone. The date might move due to other reasons or either party might coincide.

The state is going to have to run a series calculus on whether to appeal this case. If the district court rules for the plaintiffs then the magazine ban for the state of California is over, as currently written into law, but the case would have no real weight outside of this case.

The state could then pass a different magazine ban and that ban would have to be challenged. This could go on for an extend period of time. As those cases were heard in district courts, those courts that were anti-gun would cite back to this case and then rule the same way.

If the state thinks the Ninth Circuit will rule for them, they know that the plaintiffs will appeal to the Supreme Court and if the Supreme Court grants cert. they will lose and all magazine bans around the country are gone. If the Supreme Court does not grant cert. then the magazine ban will stay in place and will apply to 15 different districts across 11 different states and territories.

Read More

Tuesday Tunes

Last week, as I was digging through the filings in Rupp v. Bonta this song popped up in my music queue. I think I had heard it way back when, but certainly nothing more recent than a decade or two.

There is one thing I have learned about lawyers in my many years, my lawyers have all been good people, their lawyers have all been assholes.

My lawyer wayback when hired a new secretary. When I came into see my lawyer she recognized me. She use to work at a different lawyer’s firm. That firm had represented my wife during our divorce. I had a terrible hatred for that dude because of the way he helped my wife get one over on me.

Anyway this secretary, when she recognized me, told me that she remembered me from coming into her office. How she had appreciated how I had treated her and the rest of the staff. Then she shocked me by telling me that my ex-wife’s lawyer liked me better than he liked his client and thought I had done a good job of representing myself in the end.

Lawyers are like the pitbulls that J.Kb. talks about. They are vicious and nasty and evil, but when they are protecting you, that is exactly what you want. You just have to be careful they don’t get off their leash.

Lawyer Jokes in bad taste

Q: What do you call 25 attorneys buried up to their chins in cement?
A: Not enough cement.

Q: What do you call 25 skydiving lawyers?
A: Skeet.

Q: How can you tell when a lawyer is lying?
A: Their lips are moving.

Q: Why did New Jersey get all the toxic waste and California all the lawyers?
A: New Jersey got to pick first.

Q: What do you call 5000 dead lawyers at the bottom of the ocean?
A: A good start!

The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers.Henry VII, William Shakespeare

Poll Results

It seems that my long articles aren’t scaring you all off to much. On Sunday’s post I made some changes to add section headers to make it easier to read and used the “read more” option let you decide if you are truly interested in reading more about that subject.

People don’t seem to have an issue with my pull quotes, so for the time being I’ll continue to do them as I have been.

I have started to do a few more short quotes with links back to the sources to make somethings shorter.

Cases we Lost: Fyock v. Sunnyvale 9th Circuit 2015

B.L.U.F. The 2008 Heller case was a huge win for us. Yet somehow it didn’t result in the changes in infringements we expected. This is one of the cases we lost which was used to keep infringing regulations in place.


In this interlocutory appeal, Leonard Fyock, William Douglas, Scott Hochstetler, David Pearson, Brad Seifers, and Ron Swanson (collectively “Fyock”) challenge an order denying their request to preliminarily enjoin an ordinance recently enacted by the City of Sunnyvale, California (“Sunnyvale”), restricting the possession of “large-capacity magazines”—statutorily defined as a detachable ammunition feeding device capable of accepting more than ten rounds. Fyock claims that Sunnyvale’s ordinance, part of a ballot measure known as Measure C, violates his Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms and will irreparably harm him if not immediately enjoined.
Fyock v. Sunnyvale, 779 F. 3d 991 – Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit 2015

Why is this case important?

This case is important because this is one of the circuit level cases cited in multiple Second Amendment cases to support the use of intermediate scrutiny. The other commonly cited case is Kolbe v Hogan which was decided in the 4th circuit court.

These two cases came post Heller. As discussed multiple times in previous articles, when a case is decided that puts the brakes on for some sort of infringement, the infringers read through those opinions with a fine tooth comb looking for something to hang their infringements on.

Prior to Heller cases were heard and dismissed for lack of standing. Those same cases, post Heller came back through the courts and the state had new arguments to support their infringements that fit within the framework set out in Heller.

We’ve all had this type of argument. They say something you disagree with. You counter with your argument. They bring up supporting evidence and you counter. You win because you have a better grasp of the facts and reality. They immediately tell you that they didn’t have the position they had because of the reasons they just argued unsuccessfully with you, no it is this other reason.

I’m a numbers guy. My brain hears numbers and they just make sense. When we were dissolving a LLC the other people in the LLC were buying us out. They offered a sum. They justified it with a set of numbers. I pointed out their numbers were bogus. At the next arbitration they offered exactly the same sum but with an entirely different set of justification numbers.

Those were just as bogus. I shot them down. At the next arbitration they offered the same amount yet again with still a third set of numbers to justify. I showed how those numbers were bogus as well. I then asked “All you have for the buy out is that sum, right?” They looked at each other and nodded.

“Ok, then stop trying to justify that offer with bogus numbers. It is what you have and there isn’t any more.”

Sometimes these court cases feel like that. The state has but a single position and they will argue that position a dozen different ways, all as bogus as the last.

LCM in Sunnyvale California

After Heller the states didn’t have the same knee jerk reaction at the legislative level that they did after Bruen, instead the issues were fought in court. In court the state through plate after plate of spaghetti at the wall to see what would stick. As soon as one piece stuck, the rest of the infringing states incorporated that argument into their own building up case law to the point where the Heller opinion had been all but neutered.

Fyock v. Sunnyvale came about because the city of Sunnyvale decided to “do something” and passed an ordinance banning Large Capacity Magazines.

The history of LCM bans in California started with the federal “Crime Control Act” of 1994. Part of the CCA was the AWB. There was also a LCM ban as part of that. In 2000 California put into place a ban on the manufacture, sale, purchase, transfer, and receipt of LCMs. They did not ban the possession of LCMs.

They didn’t feel the need to for some reason.

In 2004, the CCA sunset ending the federal AWB and LCM ban.

The state and the Ninth Circus court declared that this created a “loophole” where people in California could possess LCMs even if they couldn’t get new ones.

In 2013, the city of Sunnyvale had a citizen driven initiative on the ballot to ban the possession of LCMs. It passed.

Read More

How I write analysis posts

B.L.U.F. Fluff piece because I can’t stand reading another word of Bonta’s so called “experts”


Through one of my feeds I get a notice of some case that is happening and interesting. If I’m very lucky there will be a link to that case in some way. Most of the time there is not.

If the source is a news article it is highly likely that not only have they failed to link to the case or legislation, they have likely miss named it as well. For example the “Don’t say gay” Florida bill that didn’t have those words in the bill. All searches for “don’t say gay” will take you to propaganda pieces telling you how bad the “Don’t say gay” bill is but with no links and no text.

Once I find some official documentation I next attempt to find the case number.

This has been a learning curve for me. It turns out that case names and numbers change as cases move through the courts. So what was filed as “Steven Rupp; Steven Dumber; Cheryl Johnson; Michael Jones; Christopher Seifert; Alfonso Valenceia; Troy Willis; and California Rifle & Pistol Association, Incorporated vs. Xavier Becerra, in his official capacity as Attorney General of the State of California; and DOES 1-10” had a case number of 8:17-cv-00746 assigned to it.

This became “Steven Rupp, et al v. Xavier Becerra” with a case number of “8:17-cv-00746-JLS-JDE” when it got to the ninth circuit court. The turned into “Steven Rupp; et al v. Rob Bonta, in his official capacity as Attorney General of the State of California” case number 19-56004.

When the case was vacated and remanded back to the district court the case number became 8:17-cv-00746-JLS-JDE and became known as “Steven Rupp, et al. v. Xavier Becerra, in his official capacity as Attorney General of State of California”.

And the case is known as “Rupp v. Bonta” for the most part. It is all the same case.

Read More