CCDL Joins Amicus Brief in Duncan v. Becerra

Last week CCDL joined over twenty other law enforcement and firearms rights groups in filing an amicus brief in the 9th Circuit Court case of Duncan v. Becerra. This is a case regarding California’s ban on possession of magazines holding over ten rounds with no grandfather clause.
That’s right, confiscation of lawfully obtained private property.

Now it seems that every time we file one of these briefs, someone always complains that we’re getting involved in cases that don’t impact our members. Why is a Connecticut group wasting resources on a problem 3000 miles away in California?

It should be obvious, but apparently it isn’t. These cases can have a HUGE effect on gun rights nationwide. That’s why many of these same groups filed briefs in our case. If California is allowed to confiscate lawfully obtained magazines because they exceed an arbitrary capacity, how soon before other states like our own follow?

You can read the entire amicus brief here (pdf file): CCDL amicus brief Duncan FILESTAMPED.pdf

If you would like to see other documents file in this case, click here.

12 thoughts on “CCDL Joins Amicus Brief in Duncan v. Becerra

  1. Thank you for all that CCDL has done and continues to do to protect gun owner’s rights no matter where the fight takes us because what happens in one state can potentially affect us all.

  2. Agreed this is important for us to get into the fight of common groups. Of course California called this on themselves by voting these morons into office just as we did in Connecticut.

    So let’s spend some money to get these anti second amendment people out of office this next election. As long as Murphy Malloy and blumenthal are I offer it’ll be more of the same.

    Start early , start NOW! Let’s turn this state Republican and not have these issues anymore.

    Can’t sit silent and only talk to other 2A supporters about it and win.

    You need to talk to others and bring them over to our side. Not argue with them but talk to them.

    And for those anti trumpers you’re just as bad if not worse than the Democrats you fall into their devicice trap and undermine the cause from within.

    You won’t see liberals doing that!

    • Its time to vote these bad asses out of office once and for all they have chased how many gun business that used to manufacture guns even for our military but all were chased out of business by all these lawmakers and the Governor all played huge parts as well by changing laws as well to make our lives a living hell as well !!!!!!!

  3. At what point in time will law abiding gun owners become criminals due to erosion
    of our gun rights?

    • Gary, There was a point in time when law abiding gun owners became criminals and said “enough is enough” but that was several hundred years ago. Back then men stood up for what they believed in and risked and gave their lives so that the generations that followed would have something better. Those great men gave us the Constitution and the second amendment. Today we are too complacent and are afraid to quickly loose what we have gained by “starting trouble”…so instead we loose it slowly over time without the ability to stop it.

  4. Although voting gun haters out of office is a great first step, the overall culture in CT is very antagonistic to guns and self defense, thanks to Sandy hoax and the years of anti gun propaganda that followed.

    Add to that the attitude of the police in CT who the vast majority will “just follow orders” in ENFORCING draconian laws, because that’s there job right? Law enforcement

    You have to get liberal progressives out of office, then start the hard work of trying to get the culture turned around and change of thinking regarding law abiding, responsible gun ownership.

    This will not happen overnight because the culture has been slowly changed in its thinking about legal gun ownership and armed self defense, just like CA and many other democratic run states.

    I am speaking from experience, as I left CT 4 years ago to a southwest state that has a deep bedded gun culture and firearms are a big part of the culture and are openly takes about (even with police).

  5. CCDL needs to come to the realization that we have the right to possess guns. As such, the government cannot regulate things related to guns at all. So why ask for permission via court filings? Seems as if by making such filings one is acknowledging that such things can be regulated.

    I don’t ask for permission to do things that a right allows me to do; I don’t run to the law books to see if I can; the right itself insures that I can. Any law would be trying to turn that right into a permission.

    10 round mags are now the “high capacity mags”. Well, we can’t have high capacity mags, so government has said in this state. How many deaths=mass killing? 4. Its an arbitrary number of course. They will look into lowering the mag capacity to one or zero, as they have before.

    Here, in CT, its now 10 rounds. CCDL offers no recommendation other than “to follow the law”. Likely will continue this even if down to 1 round. CCDL does not realize that the “10 rd. mag law” is nothing more than a void statute. No court needs to rule on this. Since when do we need people in robes telling us our rights?

    • What you say is 100% true. However, not realistic in application because tyranny was ALLOWED to creep in.

      The time to stop it would have been when malloy proposed his registration.the gun owners of CT should have collectively informed malloy that there would be no adherence to such nonsensical draconian gun laws.

      What would have happened next? Do you think he would send out police to arrest everyone? I doubt it. And if he did…..well that is where the 2nd Amendment is allowed to demonstrate itself……

      Remember the Bundy Ranch incident? Perhaps if CT gun owners loomed likes that you would still be free.

      Now, too many, will say that we don’t promote violence, and we are peaceful and don’t want any trouble…..i say amen to that!!!

      However if you allow apathy and normalcy bias to get the best of you, you will enter kumbaya land while politicians who want to disarm you all in the name of “public safety” are robbing you, your children and your grand children the God given right to self defense against criminals and rogue government.

      “When the government fears the people, there is Liberty…..when the people fear the government, there is tyranny”

      Attributed toThomas Jefferson

  6. How has that strategy worked for you so far, David?
    Perhaps you should lead by example?
    Grab your handgun with more than 10 bullets in the mag, strap it on and drive on over to the East Lyme PD and walk on in and dare them to infringe upon your rights.

    As soon as you successfully do that and demonstrate you’re right, every gun owner in CT will follow your lead. Until then, we’ll just read this and laugh.
    http://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/DocumentInquiry/DocumentInquiry.aspx?DocumentNo=12877185

    • This is the problem with that thinking, and will only lead to more loss of freedom, I promise.

      After malloy announced his registration of “evil black rifles” and all “high” capacity magazines…..there should have been a 100% refusal of all gun owners in CT to refuse. But thetre was not, because there is no real unity , networking amongst gun owners. Some refused to register, most are too afraid to put it all on the line, obeyed with draconian tyrannical gun laws and filled out the paperwork, or stood in Nazi like lines like good sheeple do to register their legally purchased and owned firearms and magazines, all because a few politicians decide to override the Constitution, in the “CONstiutution state” in knee jerk response to a highly suspect
      News story about a supposed active shooter in Sandy Hook.

      Their agenda was their way before Sandy Hook, they just needed the right “event” to leverage off of to convince the brain dead public that the answer Is yet MORE gun laws.

      God help you if another “active shooter event” occurs again, I think that would push things towards a gun confiscation…..of course the state and the police who will “just follow orders” will know exactly which houses to go to because y’all told them exactly what you have.

      Tolerance is acceptance. As long as you go along with a law that you know is not right, and against the supreme law of the Constitutional Republic, then you will continue to lose freedom.

      Anyone who thinks the 10 round magazine capacity will be reversed, I have a bridge to sell you…..spend some more time reading history. It ain’t gonna happen. Show me one state that repealed its mag cap law from 10 back to 30.

      • I did not say “do nothing”. My recommendation: stop convicting people of crimes, any and all crimes, until our rights are no longer the subject of government tyranny.

        Now go back to PA13-3 and its legislative process. Done behind closed doors (recall end of Feb 2013 with no bill and then no more public meetings and then, as if by magic, Bill 1096 pops out in March). CCDL could have (and still can due to lack of minutes produced) file a civil complaint and seek that PA13-3 be voided.

        What? The legislature has meetings in backrooms all the time so it must be legal to make law this way, right?

        Well, read a case that’s pending (with oral arguments being heard on 1-24-18, today). Below is the FOIC’s brief on this issue:

        http://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/DocumentInquiry/DocumentInquiry.aspx?DocumentNo=13471499

        The answer is no: the general assembly cannot have closed door meetings. And caucus exemption rarely applies as these meetings include non-members, members of other parties, people from state agencies giving them info, etc.

        And its questionable even if a caucus exemption is allowed with the general assembly given our state constitution (Colorado has similar circumstances and their supreme court noted that caucus exemption is not available to the general assembly and their committees).

        • http://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/DocumentInquiry/DocumentInquiry.aspx?DocumentNo=13560726

          A most recent case relating to the continual need to produce meeting minutes (which the task force and its subcommittees that created PA13-3 did not) is linked above.

          It does not matter if the agency exists or not-you still have the right for meeting minutes. Of course, the subcommittees did not produce meeting minutes of their illegal behind closed door meetings.

          CCDL should seek out these minutes (which don’t exist) and then file a case seeking that PA13-3 be voided due to the lack of them.

          Why hasn’t CCDL done this yet?

Comments are closed.