Silverira v Lockyer? Wasn't that in the opinion?
"Because the Second Amendment affords only a collective right to own or possess guns or other firearms, the district court's dismissal of plaintiffs' Second Amendment claims is AFFIRMED. . . . The constitutional challenges to the validity of the California Assault Weapons Control Act are all rejected, with the exception of the claim relating to the retired officers provision.
AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED."
I believe similar opinions were rendered in Fresno Rifle & Pistol Club v. Van de Kamp, 965 F. 2d 723 (9th Cir. 1992); Hickman v. Block, 81 F. 3d 998 (9th Cir. 1996), cert denied, 519 U. S. 912 (1996); San Diego County Gun Rights Committee v. Reno, 98 F. 3d 11121 (9th Cir. 1996); and United States v. Mack, 164 F.3d 467, 474 (9th Cir. 1999).
That's just the 9th Circuit, and that was just a quick search.
Sorry, I made two mistakes.
First, I didn’t realize I was replying to you. I try not to encourage your annoyances.
Second, you are right, and did find the rare case on point. Yes, this opinion may be overturned, if Parker is held to apply to the states.
Good job on the search. I’m curious... do you agree with the 9th Circuit?