Posted on 05/27/2016 6:28:01 PM PDT by marktwain
San Francisco is posed to pass an ordinance to require all guns not carried on your person to be unloaded and locked up. It would be very close to the Washington, D.C. case of District of Columbia v. Heller, where the Supreme Court reaffirmed that the Second Amendment was a fundamental, individual right to keep and carry arms for self defense. The difference with this ordinance is that it allows a person to carry a loaded handgun on their person, in their home, but requires all other firearms to be unloaded and locked up.
The proposal comes after the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal filed by the National Rifle Association seeking to block a city 2007 ordinance that requires residents to store handguns in a locked container or disabled with a trigger lock that has been approved by the Department of Justice.
Farrell is now proposing to add what are called long guns to the requirement, which are rifles or shotguns.
Farrell’s legislation advanced toward approval Monday out of the Board of Supervisors Land Use and Economic Development Committee. The full board is expected to approve it next week.
It is likely that the ordinance will be challenged. One of the main findings in the Heller case was that it was unconstitutional to remove a whole class of firearms as being useful for self defense in the home. From Heller:
(Excerpt) Read more at ammoland.com ...
This ordinance is blatantly unconstitutional.
Another reason to replace Scalia with someone just a much a constitutionalist, if not more so.
Clone Thomas?
Just today I decided to move my 12 gauge into the car as part of my “get home” bag.
Hmm.. I do like living in America.
How do they expect to enforce this requirement? Will they send “inspectors” to every household every night? Do they really expect citizens to voluntarily comply with this burden?
This is clearly illegal.
In addition:
And how do they plan to enforce this? Go house to house and search?
I expect enforcement to go something like this:
A homeowner calls the police and says that he just shot at/ scared off a home invader.
The police arrive, grill the homeowner, and determine that the long gun used was not locked up. Then they cite the homeowner.
Ditto if an accident occurs or if the police notice an unlocked long gun during some other interaction.
If the person shots someone witha long gun inside their home they will investigate and interrogate them.
And it it completely unenforceable.
No legal way to enforce it.
Just make sure you double tap the perp who breaks in.
Dead men tell no tales.
Scotch guard your entry way floor
No teachers will ask the childrens
Is Mark Farrell related to another Farrell, possibly Ron, who was in the State Assembly or LA city council ( a real communist sympathizer)?
Faggieville, aka San Francisco, is not America. Not any more.
A city gets the government it votes for. “Home invasion” now means the police busting in, not the burglars.
“Go house to house and search?”
The fascist Democrats would like nothing more than an excuse to do so.
/no sarc
Sanctuary city Frisco has the same contempt for the laws as Obama’s DHS.
One reason resident Mexicans were going loco in San Diego today is they know Trump will have his Justice Dept. enforce the laws.
Can’t come too soon ...
Simple answer. Saw the shotgun barrel off.
In the UK you have to be licensed to own a gun. The cops made a visit, and asked for the key to the safe to check things out.
The guy's wife handed them the key and they arrested her as she didn't have a license, yet had access to the safe.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.