Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Posted on 07/26/2025 8:55:56 AM PDT by ransomnote
Sacramento, California – A federal appeals court on Thursday struck down California’s voter-approved requirement that ammunition buyers undergo background checks, ruling the measure violates the Second Amendment. The decision delivers a significant blow to California’s efforts to strengthen its already strict gun control laws.
In a 2–1 decision, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a lower court’s 2024 ruling that the ammunition law is unconstitutional. Originally passed by voters in 2016 as Proposition 63, the law took effect in 2019 and required individuals to pass a background check—costing either $1 or $19—each time they purchased ammunition.
The court concluded that the law imposes an undue burden on the right to bear arms by limiting access to ammunition, which is essential for firearms to function. Writing for the majority, Judge Sandra Segal Ikuta argued that the requirement “meaningfully constrains” that right by subjecting individuals to repeated screenings before they can purchase bullets.
The case centers on the interpretation of the Second Amendment in the wake of recent Supreme Court rulings, including the 2022 decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, which requires modern gun laws to align with the nation’s historical traditions. Under this framework, many of California’s gun regulations are facing renewed legal scrutiny.
Governor Gavin Newsom, a vocal proponent of gun safety measures, condemne
(Excerpt) Read more at sandiegopost.com ...
|
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
One it cuts state revenue. Two since dems dont stop criminals and instead subsidize them through their policies, this will surely hamper crimnals efforts to harm and take what they want from CA citizens. Third dems hate anything that truly allows citizens to defend themselves against criminals, because that also means government criminals, because socialists know exactly what they themselves are, and dont want citizens to ever be able to defend against government criminals.
Now if we could just get back to 20-round magazines and legalizing silencers to facilitate target practice I’d be set.
In reality, it takes both a court ruling, AND CA law enforcement informing the (in and out of state) ammunition sellers that the background checks are no longer needed. I haven't seen yet where this has taken place.
Asinine, but true.
How does this effect IL?
You can write that but the real world effect is immediate.
/sarc
It takes one legislative session to enact an unconstitutional law. It has taken 9 years to get this one revoked. Many others longer and still counting. Something has to change.
Yes, the court ruling is in effect.
Many/most stores have already implemented the court ruling, both shipping to CA home addresses (including free shipping by some of the largest interstate sellers and smaller companies) and local neighborhood stores selling to walk-in buyers there.
Why it took 8 long years (?) to get a court ruling on such a clear constitutional issue? The slow judicial system enables renegrade or communistic state legislatures to get away with depriving people’s constitutionally-recognized rights and liberties. The evil legislatures wouldn’t even bother passing such obviously- unconstitutional laws if the courts would just set up a same-day emergency review and injunction system for attempted deprivations of constitutional liberties.
Some out of state ammo sellers are shipping to CA, many are holding off until it is clear if this is a "Freedom Week" scenario or not.
I haven't stopped by my local gun shops yet to see what they are doing. My FFL is absolutely saying "hold off on direct out-of-state purchases for now".
One it cuts state revenue. Two since dems dont stop criminals and instead subsidize them through their policies, this will surely hamper crimnals efforts to harm and take what they want from CA citizens. Third dems hate anything that truly allows citizens to defend themselves against criminals, because that also means government criminals, because socialists know exactly what they themselves are, and dont want citizens to ever be able to defend against government criminals.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Three excellent points!
Saving the taxpayers a few bucks
The slow judicial system enables renegade or communist state legislatures to get away with depriving people’s constitutionally recognized rights and liberties. The evil legislatures wouldn’t even bother passing such obviously- unconstitutional laws if the courts would just set up a same-day emergency review and injunction system for attempted deprivations of constitutional liberties.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>...
Excellent points!
I guess Californians won’t have to go out of state to buy ammo unless this ruling is stayed.
Ordered yesterday from Midway.
California voters approved Proposition 63 by a nearly 2-1 vote. It was not even close. The turnout was 75%.
An nice side effect is that my local Sportsman’s Warehouse put a nice selection of ammo on sale just a tad cheaper than Midway.
Voting is usually rigged in California - I’m shocked actual votes were counted!
Or, “When justice sleeps, justice is canceled.”
Suppressors, not silencers.
While I don’t care what they are called, the loonies like silencer so they can claim crimes can be committed with a gun and no one will even hear it.
Besides, don’t they want to protect the hearing of their beloved criminals?
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.