Copyright ©2003-2010 Anthony Canales

Anthony Canales is the President of the San Fernando Valley NRA Member’s Council. He works as a Quality Control Manager in Glendale, California. He is married with one son.
 

Search this site:

Help
Advanced

 
The opinions expressed in 'News Briefs' belong solely to the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Rifle Association of America or the NRA Members' Councils of California.

Home
Volunteer
Members' Councils
Join NRA
Links
E-Mail

Support Our Troops with Project Bore Snake
 
All Columns:

2010

Condor Documents


03-07-2010
02-24-2010
02-06-2010
01-18-2010
01-07-2010

2009

12-09-2009
12-05-2009
10-26-2009
10-20-2009
10-16-2009
08-22-2009
08-08-2009
07-15-2009
07-01-2009
06-27-2009
03-09-2009
03-08-2009
03-04-2009
02-25-2009
02-23-2009
02-19-2009
02-18-2009
02-13-2009
02-06-2009
02-05-2009
02-04-2009
02-03-2009
01-28-2009
01-23-2009
01-20-2009
01-15-2009

2008

12-18-2008
12-17-2008
12-10-2008
12-06-2008
12-05-2008
12-02-2008
11-27-2008
11-18-2008
11-06-2008
10-14-2008
10-01-2008
09-23-2008
09-19-2008
09-17-2008
09-11-2008
09-10-2008
09-09-2008
08-29-2008
08-24-2008
08-22-2008
08-01-2008
07-21-2008
06-26-2008
06-11-2008
06-03-2008
05-28-2008
03-20-2008
03-12-2008
01-19-2008
2007

12-31-2007
12-28-2007
12-19-2007
10-17-2007
09-25-2007
09-06-2007
08-18-2007
08-10-2007
05-18-2007
04-27-2007
03-08-2007
02-22-2007
2006
11-11-2006
10-17-2006
10-10-2006
09-26-2006
09-11-2006
08-10-2006
06-29-2006
06-22-2006
04-12-2006
03-10-2006
03-03-2006
02-23-2006
02-17-2006
02-16-2006
02-14-2006
01-24-2006
01-12-2006
2005
10-25-2005
10-03-2005
09-30-2005
09-11-2005
08-22-2005
08-04-2005
07-04-2005
06-29-2005
06-10-2005
05-31-2005
05-27-2005
05-24-2005
05-17-2005
04-26-2005
04-25-2005
04-19-2005
03-22-2005
02-05-2005
01-30-2005
01-26-2005
01-16-2005
01-06-2005
2004
12-25-2004
12-16-2004
12-07-2004
12-02-2004
11-24-2004
11-17-2004
11-15-2004
11-10-2004
11-03-2004
10-21-2004
10-18-2004
09-11-2004
08-30-2004
08-21-2004
08-19-2004
08-14-2004
08-13-2004
08-06-2004
07-30-2004
07-29-2004
07-28-2004
07-25-2004
07-21-2004
07-15-2004
06-23-2004
06-16-2004
06-06-2004
06-04-2004
05-24-2004
05-19-2004
05-13-2004
05-06-2004
04-28-2004
04-15-2004
04-13-2004
04-08-2004
03-31-2004
03-24-2004
03-17-2004
03-03-2004
02-18-2004
02-09-2004
02-06-2004
01-16-2004
01-14-2004
01-07-2004
01-05-2004
2003
12-24-2003
12-19-2003
12-18-2003
12-15-2003
12-10-2003
12-05-2003
12-01-2003
11-25-2003
11-12-2003
11-11-2003
11-07-2003
10-30-2003
10-29-2003
10-27-2003
10-13-2003
10-10-2003
10-09-2003
10-07-2003
10-04-2003
09-29-2003
09-27-2003
09-25-2003
09-24-2003
09-18-2003
09-17-2003
09-15-2003
09-07-2003
09-03-2003
08-27-2003
08-26-2003
08-25-2003
08-20-2003
08-18-2003
08-17-2003
08-15-2003
08-11-2003
08-10-2003
08-04-2003
08-03-2003
07-30-2003
07-23-2003
07-22-2003
07-21-2003
07-16-2003
07-10-2003
07-08-2003
07-06-2003
06-25-2003
06-23-2003
06-18-2003
06-16-2003
06-10-2003
06-09-2003
06-03-2003
05-28-2003
05-27-2003
05-19-2003
05-16-2003
05-13-2003
05-09-2003
05-07-2003
05-06-2003
05-02-2003
05-01-2003
04-29-2003
04-28-2003
04-24-2003
04-21-2003
04-16-2003
04-15-2003
04-11-2003
04-09-2003
04-04-2003
04-01-2003
03-29-2003
03-28-2003
03-26-2003
03-25-2003
03-23-2003
03-21-2003
03-19-2003
03-19-2003
03-18-2003
03-17-2003
03-12-2003
03-11-2003
03-09-2003
03-06-2003
03-05-2003
03-04-2003
03-01-2003
02-28-2003
02-25-2003
02-21-2003
02-19-2003
02-14-2003
02-12-2003
02-07-2003
02-03-2003
02-02-2003

March 7, 2010 

 

 




"...CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Your approach-- your original approach 
would give judges a lot more power and flexibility in determining what rights 
they think a good idea than they have now with the constraints of the Due 
Process Clause.

MR. GURA: No, Your Honor; our approach might actually actually provide 
judges with perhaps no more than what they have now, perhaps even less, 
because our approach is rooted in text and history. It's not a license for judges 
to make up enenumerated rights that they believe--

CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Privileges and immunities give you a lot more 
flexibility than due process, because it is not limited to procedural-- where 
you don't have to deal with the hurdle that it's limited to procedural by the text.

MR. GURA: Sure. If I may? 

CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Yes, you may. 

MR. GURA: We believe that it's more limited because that-- that text had a 
specific understanding and that there are guide posts left behind in texts and 
history that tell us how to apply it, unlike the due process. But at least we know 
one thing, which is that in 1868 the right to keep and bear arms was understood 
to be a privilege or immunity of citizenship, and if the Court is considering 
watering down the Second Amendment perhaps it should look to text and history.

CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Thank you, counsel.

MR. GURA: Thanks.

CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: The case is submitted....."
 
				- From the draft oral arguments of 
                                                      McDonald v. Chicago, March 2, 2010, 
                                                      Page 63 of 77,  discussion of  
                                                      incorporation by the Privileges 
                                                      and Immunities Clause-
 
 
To All, 
    Time to whip out that "little guillotine", it seems:
 
 
Lawyers, Guns, And Other People's Money:
     Those firearms activists who live on the World Infamous Left Coast, home of 
the US Judiciary's 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, can hardly imagine a situation
where anyone in their right minds would give "free reign" to unchecked judicial 
activism.
 
     Yet if Chief Justice Robert's question to Alan Gura during oral arguments of
McDonald the other day is of any indication, someone out there was not taking
into account all the possibilities of what appears to be a massive downside to
a purely theoretical exercise on the part of a few with little real "skin in game". 
 
     In other words, Alan Gura seems to be relying on a self-imposed judicial 
restraint, or at least judicial reticence to go off hunting for more penumbras, 
over the issue of the right to keep and bear arms. 
 
     It's either that, or that the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court has not a clue 
as to what constrains him and 8 other Justices when they pass judgment from 
the Highest Court in the land. 
 
    Personally, this poster would bet real money that it's the Chief Justice here 
who understands what it takes to keep Pandora's Box locked and secure. And
while it's understandable that others may have a high opinion of Mr. Gura's 
talents, perhaps next time he can try his unique style of legal arbitrage on a
topic more innocuous and less critical to the safety of the Republic. There is
only so much Mylanta one can take.
 
Link at:
 
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/08-1521.pdf
 
 
Good Enough For Government Work:
     In the year and a half since the ban on lead centerfire and rimfire ammunition 
went into effect across much of California, firearms activists have been on "pins 
and needles" to see if yet another product of the California Legislature performs 
as advertised. 
 
     Well folks, some preliminary numbers are in, and it does not look good for
Pedro Nava's credibility with his confrere's that the blood lead levels of quite a
number of Central Coast California condors remain significantly elevated. This is
despite a requirement that hunters and holders of depredation permits use très-
expensive ammunition, and even environmental activists opine that hunter
compliance with the Assemblyman from Santa Barbara's diktat is very good. 
 
     These results were first reported at a December 11-12, 2009 Field Team 
Meeting to the California Condor Recovery Program. It seems that, out of 27 birds 
from the Pinnacles National Monument contingent, for a grand total of 84 
blood tests, almost two-thirds of the tests show elevated blood lead levels.
Also, some 30 percent of test results show blood lead concentrations 
in excess of 30 micrograms per deciliter (See Pinnacles Field Team Report).
 
      What is more, 20 of 27 Pinnacles condors (almost 75%) were found to
have had elevated blood lead levels to the point of requiring chelation even to the
Condor Recovery Program's "generous" standards for chelation. 
 
      These preliminary numbers are, at the very least, comparable to values
reported by the Program prior to the ban (See Pinnacles Chelation List ). 
 
      This information was discovered through Public Record Act and Freedom
of Information Act document productions. What is more, this information was 
delivered as part of a presentation to the California Fish & Game Commission
on March 3, 2010. As such, it is now part of the public record and can be referred
to in the battles to come over the ineffectiveness of mandatory lead ammunition
bans. Given that Pedro Nava proposes mandatory bans of lead birdshot in
State Wildlife Areas (AB 2223), calling him to account for the apparent failures 
of past actions is all part of the political process. At the very least, it will be an
interesting question to ask Nava as he stumps the state as Audubon's Candidate
for California Attorney General. Stay tuned.
 
Link at:
 
http://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/asm/ab_2201-2250/
ab_2223_bill_20100218_introduced.html
 
 
 
 
 
Laughter Is The Best Medicine:
    Perhaps NBC should have put Sarah Palin into the Tonight Show slot, instead 
of letting Fox News get her as a commentator. No wonder why they are going
broke...
 
 
Respectfully,

 

 

Anthony Canales

SFVMC-NRA

 

 

Copyright 2010 Anthony Canales,

except as noted. All rights reserved.


 
N R A   --   p e o p l e   p r o t e c t i n g   f r e e d o m
Home  | Volunteer | Members' Councils | Join the NRA | Links
CAL-ERTs | Contact Us | Legislative Info & Contact Tools

  Golden gate United NRA Members' Council