Posted on 06/05/2021 10:38:34 AM PDT by Navy Patriot
A federal judge overturned California's 32-year-old ban on so-called assault-style weapons on Friday, describing it as a "failed experiment" and prompting scathing criticism from the state's governor and attorney general.
California has prohibited the sale of the weapons since 1989. The ban was challenged in a 2019 lawsuit against California's attorney general by plaintiffs including James Miller, a state resident, and the San Diego County Gun Owners, a political action committee.
"This case is about what should be a muscular constitutional right and whether a state can force a gun policy choice that impinges on that right with a 30-year-old failed experiment," judge Roger Benitez of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California wrote in the court order filed late on Friday.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
Ping
Caetano v Massachusetts 2016 SCOTUS
Important contribution, the argument that 2A doesn't cover Arms created after 1789 is specious on it's face.
not only was the law an obvious infringement on American citizens’s rights,
but it was stupid AND idiotic, too.
how in HWLL can any legislators think they have the right to pass firearms restrictions in USA?!
and
if that’s the best they can do at it, ha ha! what a joke!
(note that everyone in CA reports they just shrugged off the socalled law anyway, as people do with most of these “gun controls”...the problem now is getting enough ammunition for adequate self-defense (and a little practice) against any attempted governmental interference or harrassment... harrassment via “criminalization” of millions of American citizens is the obvious idea, since no police officer or sheriff in his/her right mind would ever attempt seizing a firearm from an American. They would only “confiscate” private property in their wildest wet dreams, but they DO STILL WANT to “criminalize’ as many citizens as they can.. in order to have a “charge” available against anybody they want to control or intimidate. This is a big time tactic of Nazi and Communist dictatorships...)
Oh Nos , LOL
Agreed.
GW Bush nominee. Aside from John Roberts, most of GW’s judicial picks haven’t been too bad.
“They would only “confiscate” private property in their wildest wet dreams, but they DO STILL WANT to “criminalize’ as many citizens as they can.. in order to have a “charge” available against anybody they want to control or intimidate.”
How do government weenies plan to “charge” people who are better trained and shoot better than the potato chip eating, coke-guzzling 300-lb fat slobs who make up the bureaucracy?
I read the district judge’s ruling on this. Excellent detail and explanations. This is going to be difficult to overturn. I think. Maybe.
Really ripped apart the State’s case.
our neighbor says that if they show up with too much blubber and it might require two bullets
Or maybe a Moby Dick harpoon.
Call me Ismael.
“and prompting scathing criticism from the state’s governor and attorney general.”
Translation: We’re a bunch of fat, stupid leftist pigs with no training or military combat experience and know that you have us outgunned and out-manned. We’re scared, and with good reason.
There were still assault style weapons being sold in the state
as late as 1993.
The “Swiss Army Knife” of rifles.
That’s the greatest marketing ‘catch phrase’ any rifle could ever aspire to.
The most important observation about this decision.
This Judge is solid in his History, Logic, Analysis, Constitutional Law, and Presentation.
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.