| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| Fed judge tosses California’s ammo background check requirement as unconstitutional ‘misfire’ against liberty |
| 2020-04-25 |
| [BIZPACREVIEW] A federal judge in San Diego has mooted a Caliphornia, an impregnable bastion of the Democratic Party, law requiring people to undergo background checks before being able to purchase ammunition, the latest legal pushback against authoritarian Democrats and their never-ending quest to dismantle the Second Amendment. U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez, who was appointed by President George W. Bush, sided with the California Rifle & Pistol Association, which sued to block the law. "The experiment has been tried. The casualties have been counted. California’s new ammunition background check law misfires and the Second Amendment rights of California citizens have been gravely injured," Benitez wrote in a 120-page opinion, The News Agency that Dare Not be Named reported. The AP was sure to report that the law in question was a measure "approved by voters," but what the ’news’ organization doesn’t say is that laws that violate our founding document are null and void, whether they are popular or not — because we don’t live in a pure democracy. "The law’s red tape and state database errors made it impossible for hundreds of thousands of law-abiding Californians to purchase ammunition for sport or self-defense," Chuck Michel, the firearm group’s general counsel. "The court found that the flimsy reasons offered by the government to justify these constitutional infringements were inadequate." Related: Background checks: 2020-04-23 The (Clown) Mask Comes Off Background checks: 2020-04-14 VA Governor Signs Universal Background Checks, Gun Rationing Bill Background checks: 2020-03-18 6 Aug 2019 Article - CDC Shuts Down Army Lab's Disease Research |
| Posted by:Fred |
| #13 California might permanently ban mass gatherings Does the California assembly have to gather in a mass to pass the anti-mass-gathering law? It would be funny (and unsurprising) if they managed to ban themselves. |
| Posted by: SteveS 2020-04-25 21:36 |
| #12 California should be banned, to prevent California. |
| Posted by: Silentbrick 2020-04-25 19:33 |
| #11 California might permanently ban mass gatherings, to prevent mass shootings. |
| Posted by: bbrewer126 2020-04-25 14:47 |
| #10 If these jokers in Sacramento are outlawing assemblies of 10 or more citizens, do you think they'll allow sales of ammo? |
| Posted by: Lex 2020-04-25 14:20 |
| #9 If you're buying ammo, the presumption is that you own a gun and so the presumption must also be that you already had a background check so you could buy the gun...I would think. Just trying to be logical even though I know that doesn't always have anything to do with it. |
| Posted by: Abu Uluque 2020-04-25 13:36 |
| #8 I didn't think I was completely crazy... |
| Posted by: DarthVader 2020-04-25 12:04 |
| #7 Ammo is, of course, the point of owning a gun. You think any gun owners are doing without? |
| Posted by: M. Murcek 2020-04-25 10:53 |
| #6 Found it - you are correct - 9th Circus blocked it. Take it up, SCOTUS |
| Posted by: Frank G 2020-04-25 09:55 |
| #5 Ah, I thought they had blocked it. Buy while you can, CA! |
| Posted by: DarthVader 2020-04-25 09:40 |
| #4 An Appeal was filed - I haven't seen that they put a stay on it. It will go to the Supremes if they do On Friday state lawyers filed a motion asking Benitez to immediately issue a stay of the injunction until they could file an appeal. State lawyers said the action was needed immediately because “ammunition vendors have already started selling ammunition without background checks, creating the near certainty that prohibited persons—convicted felons, violent misdemeanants, and others prohibited by law from possessing firearms and ammunition—will have easy access to ammunition.” But Benitez was not persuaded. He said he did not think the state would win an appeal and said the focus on prohibited people buying ammunition was misplaced. In his ruling Benitez said that thousands of state residents who should have been able to buy ammunition had not been able to because of a flawed checking system that erroneously denied purchase to 16 percent of applicants. “Without an injunction, these law-abiding individuals have no legal way to acquire the ammunition which they enjoy the constitutional right of possession,” Benitez wrote. “These law-abiding individuals whose numbers are vast have no way to lawfully acquire ammunition to defend themselves, their families and their homes. The injunction restores that right.” By the end of the day, state lawyers had filed a notice of appeal in the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The ban on buying out-of-state ammo violates the Commerce Clause as well |
| Posted by: Frank G 2020-04-25 09:38 |
| #3 Don't worry. The ninth circuit put it back in place. Less than a 24 hour window to buy ammo in CA without the check. |
| Posted by: DarthVader 2020-04-25 08:45 |
| #2 Good for Judge Benitez. I'm surprised there are Federal Judges in California who still follow the Constitution. |
| Posted by: JohnQC 2020-04-25 08:27 |
| #1 Ammo gonna be right up there with reservation bought cigarettes. |
| Posted by: M. Murcek 2020-04-25 08:23 |