Is the CRPA a anti-CA gunowners association?

[NeilDown]

As many of you may have donated to CRPA an arm of the NRA, it comes as a surprise that the lawyer representing CRPA has told an en banc panel of judges that "large capacity" magazines can be banned in which the panel agreed with the lawyer and upheld the ban.

The Newest Second Amendment Sidestep in the 9th Circuit

It has been over seventeen years since the United States Supreme Court held that the right to keep and bear arms is an individual right unconnected with service in a militia.

charlesnichols.substack.com

A clip in the article will show the traitorous CRPA lawyer.

I suggest rethinking on who you donate to.

"Large Capacity" is not the same as "Standard Capacity" which are in common use and protected by the constitution and precedent.

CRPA and FPC are the only ones who are defending our 2A rights here.
- All those new roster guns
- Conceal carry permits being issued in counties after 20 years
- Conceal carry sensitive places reduced
- Many more infringements still incoming from Sacramento, the onslaught is never ending

I'm a lifetime member of CRPA, but am not politically agitated one way or another.
I do believe strongly in the second amendment and we need these organizations on the front line.

 

[Jon F]

As many of you may have donated to CRPA an arm of the NRA, it comes as a surprise that the lawyer representing CRPA has told an en banc panel of judges that "large capacity" magazines can be banned in which the panel agreed with the lawyer and upheld the ban.

The Newest Second Amendment Sidestep in the 9th Circuit

It has been over seventeen years since the United States Supreme Court held that the right to keep and bear arms is an individual right unconnected with service in a militia.

charlesnichols.substack.com

A clip in the article will show the traitorous CRPA lawyer.

I suggest rethinking on who you donate to.

Are you Charles Nichols? The reason I ask is you sound exactly like him. That guy has been trashing CPRA and CalGuns for years because they focused on fighting concealed carry bans rather than back his lawsuit over open carry bans

 

[riceman]

OlderThanDirt " we should be allowed to have an M134 minigun on our trucks."​

Now that would be a hoot for us farm boys
I agree with all the logical and thinking members here.

 

[NorCalBusa]

IMO CRPA is our best hope.

But not only. Having multiple pro 2A organizations fighting the fight makes good sense.

I wish CRPA's videos would take it up a notch in attire and demeaner. It comes across as low brow and that doesn't represent us well. I'd be happy with less frequent vids that are far better produced. Nor am I suggesting a tie is needed but boots, sweatshirts, slouched in a chair begging for likes & clicks EVERY episode and using the word "absolutely" 241 times in a 15 minute video is simply..."base". Improve the production to far better grade.

 

[Plenty_Pack_556]

Let's purposely lose cases and give away rights so we can have people donate to us so we can fight to take back what's ours and what we gave away! forever. /s.

NRA and CRPA fights for open carry, after NRA supported the Mulford Act.

 

[treelogger]

... it comes as a surprise that the lawyer representing CRPA has told an en banc panel of judges that "large capacity" magazines can be banned...

A clip in the article will show the traitorous CRPA lawyer.

As an attorney licensed to practice in this state, the person has to answer questions truthfully. If I had a spare half hour, I could find out which BAR rule about professional conduct exactly says that, but trust me, there is such a rule. So lying to the court "no, large capacity mags can not be banned" would be at least ridiculous and cause the attorney to lose credibility, or outright misconduct. It is not traitorous.

Not only is the CRPA not an anti-California gun owners’ association, the CRPA is the single best chance we have to reclaim gun rights in this state.

It is true that the CRPA has, in the last half dozen years or so, won more gun rights cases in California than any other organization.

Most of them are Charlatans. Former NRA Executive Wayne LaPierre is one of the biggest hucksters in the country.

That is true for most or all gun rights organizations. The FPC got started mostly to pay Brandon Combs' salary, a good-sized 6 digit amount. The SAF funnels roughly a M$ a year into Alan Gottlieb's pockets. Similar relationships exist between GOA and the Pratt family. And the exploits of Mr. LaPierre are famous by now, as you mentioned. The CRPA is a slightly more nuanced case: Mr. Michel doesn't need the extra money, and his law firm would be plenty busy already. But the extra M$ a year that they receive from the CRPA (of which Chuck Michel is the President!) can't hurt. At least, unlike some other (in-)famous gun rights organizations, the CRPA does reasonably good work.

Someone remember the FPC or CGF law suit where their lawyer was the infamous Chuck Hokanson (name butchered to Hokey Son by some critics), who was not actually allowed to practice law (for non-payment of his BAR dues), which got caught by the court? With friends like those, who needs enemies? The good news is that the CRPA has not reached the level of total incompetence that other gun rights organizations have been at.

 

[adrkwan]

As an attorney licensed to practice in this state, the person has to answer questions truthfully. If I had a spare half hour, I could find out which BAR rule about professional conduct exactly says that, but trust me, there is such a rule. So lying to the court "no, large capacity mags can not be banned" would be at least ridiculous and cause the attorney to lose credibility, or outright misconduct. It is not traitorous.

Yup, agree with the statement. The rule is Cal. Rules of Prof. Conduct 3.3 Candor Toward the Tribunal.

The question from the en banc panel was whether there is any limit to magazine capacity which could be banned. The attorney, Erin Murphy, did a great job answering the question under the guidance from the Supreme Court in Bruen, folding in the "commonly [used] for law abiding purposes" language. I thought she should have won based on the examples of commonly issued magazines in other states (20 for pistol/30 for rifles). The only point she conceded was magazines with capacities for over 50 rounds could probably be banned.

 

[Warpspeed]

Thread has run its course /