Welcome to our New Forums!

Our forums have been upgraded and expanded!

Welcome to Our New Forums

  • Our forums have been upgraded! You can read about this HERE

U.S. judge overturns California’s ban on assault weapons

of the true light

New member
Joined
Sep 23, 2019
Messages
872
DON THOMPSON

Fri, June 4, 2021, 8:24 PM·5 min read

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — A federal judge Friday overturned California’s three-decade-old ban on assault weapons, ruling that it violates the constitutional right to bear arms.

U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez of San Diego ruled that the state’s definition of illegal military-style rifles unlawfully deprives law-abiding Californians of weapons commonly allowed in most other states and by the U.S. Supreme Court.

“Under no level of heightened scrutiny can the law survive," Benitez said. He issued a permanent injunction against enforcement of the law but stayed it for 30 days to give state Attorney General Rob Bonta time to appeal.

Gov. Gavin Newsom condemned the decision, calling it “a direct threat to public safety and the lives of innocent Californians, period."

In his 94-page ruling, the judge spoke favorably of modern weapons, said they were overwhelmingly used for legal reasons.

“Like the Swiss Army knife, the popular AR-15 rifle is a perfect combination of home defense weapon and homeland defense equipment. Good for both home and battle," the judge said in his ruling's introduction.

That comparison “completely undermines the credibility of this decision and is a slap in the face to the families who’ve lost loved ones to this weapon," Newsom said in a statement. “We’re not backing down from this fight, and we’ll continue pushing for common sense gun laws that will save lives.”

California first restricted assault weapons in 1989, with multiple updates to the law since then.

Assault weapons as defined by the law are more dangerous than other firearms and are disproportionately used in crimes, mass shootings and against law enforcement, with more resulting casualties, the state attorney general’s office argued, and barring them “furthers the state’s important public safety interests.”

Further, a surge in sales of more than 1.16 million other types of pistols, rifles and shotguns in the last year — more than a third of them to likely first-time buyers — show that the assault weapons ban “has not prevented law-abiding citizens in the state from acquiring a range of firearms for lawful purposes, including self-defense,” the state contended in a court filing in March.

Similar assault weapon restrictions have previously been upheld by six other federal district and appeals courts, the state argued. Overturning the ban would allow not only assault rifles, but things like assault shotguns and assault pistols, state officials said.

But Benitez disagreed.

“This case is not about extraordinary weapons lying at the outer limits of Second Amendment protection. The banned ‘assault weapons’ are not bazookas, howitzers, or machine guns. Those arms are dangerous and solely useful for military purposes," his ruling said.

Despite California's ban, there currently are an estimated 185,569 assault weapons registered with the state, the judge said.

“This is an average case about average guns used in average ways for average purposes," the ruling said. “One is to be forgiven if one is persuaded by news media and others that the nation is awash with murderous AR-15 assault rifles. The facts, however, do not support this hyperbole, and facts matter."

“In California, murder by knife occurs seven times more often than murder by rifle," he added.

In a preliminary ruling in September, Benitez said California’s complicated legal definition of assault weapons can ensnare otherwise law-abiding gun owners with criminal penalties that among other things can strip them of their Second Amendment right to own firearms.

"The burden on the core Second Amendment right, if any, is minimal,” the state argued, because the weapons can still be used — just not with the modifications that turn them into assault weapons. Modifications like a shorter barrel or collapsible stock make them more concealable, state officials said, while things like a pistol grip or thumbhole grip make them more lethal by improving their accuracy as they are fired rapidly.

The lawsuit filed by the San Diego County Gun Owners Political Action Committee, California Gun Rights Foundation, Second Amendment Foundation and Firearms Policy Coalition is among several by gun advocacy groups challenging California’s firearms laws, which are among the strictest in the nation.

The lawsuit filed in August 2019 followed a series of deadly mass shootings nationwide involving military-style rifles.

It was filed on behalf of gun owners who want to use high-capacity magazines in their legal rifles or pistols, but said they can’t because doing so would turn them into illegal assault weapons under California law. Unlike military weapons, the semi-automatic rifles fire one bullet each time the trigger is pulled, and the plaintiffs say they are legal in 41 states.

The lawsuit said California is “one of only a small handful states to ban many of the most popular semiautomatic firearms in the nation because they possess one or more common characteristics, such as pistol grips and threaded barrels,” frequently but not exclusively along with detachable ammunition magazines.

The state is appealing Benitez’s 2017 ruling against the state’s nearly two-decade-old ban on the sales and purchases of magazines holding more than 10 bullets. That decision triggered a weeklong buying spree before the judge halted sales during the appeal. It was upheld in August by a three-judge appellate panel, but the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said in March that an 11-member panel will rehear the case.

The state also is appealing Benitez’s decision in April 2020 blocking a 2019 California law requiring background checks for anyone buying ammunition.

Both of those measures were championed by Newsom when he was lieutenant governor, and they were backed by voters in a 2016 ballot measure.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/u-judge-overturns-california-ban-032400825.html

Your thought's?
 
If taking a position on the late-Anton Scalia's militia directive.

If you think about it from a certain perspective banning Assault Weapons is a violation of Militia and Military protectionism.

For example say your recruited for homeland defense in case of an enemy adversary invading. How can you send a civilian with a semi-Automatic non-military grade equipment or Mil-Spec'd equipment. So not only are all gun control violations of 2A. BUT the fact there is no precedent case in pre-revolutionary America and even during and after(only way later) the Revolution. Means that constitutionally speaking all anti-2As are violation of military-civilian assistance.

For example if we follow proper 2A nation-wide not only should people HAVE assault weapons and fully working automatic weapons but even Military devices can be procured. The amendment literally states right to bear arms. Even possessing frag grenades is lawful, not legal. In other words lawfully speaking we can posses military combat devices. It's like money this nation was built to use 347.45g cold coins and not use Fiat currency in other words lawfully speaking the constitution was defined to use the gold standard for not for fiat currencies even IF fiat was used during the revolutionary war people got PIST off with the inflation and the debt of over 475 million dollars to fund the revolutionary war.

For example you CAN if you had the money and it was somehow allowed posses a nuclear or thermonuclear device. The constitution does not forbid it YOU CAN posses extreme military devices without violating ANY law or legality in the U.S. based on the constitution and Militia(Minutemen) discourse.

Since reading the Army of Mankind website on Hitler being enamored by the Assault Rifle(MKB44/STG44) he called it the Sturmgewher. He changed the name was so impressed by it and the stories of the soldiers. He called it after the Stormtroopers back in WW1 particularly storm rifle as like the storm trooper use of artillery lugars and later towards the end of the war last 3-4 months the use of MP18 SMGs similar in kind to the rumors that a few Thompson SMGs were deployed in the final months of the WW1.

The sheer fact is Anti-Assault Rifle = Anti-Hitler Rifle. So if people hate Assault Rifles and want to ban them it's akin to being anti-Nazi.

As a matter of fact the anti-Assault bans hinder progress. For example most Ar-15s have little to no Mil-Specs. For example NATO-US militaries define an M4/M16 as posses a 1:7 twist i.e. 360 degree bullet travel at 7 inches of barrel length so a 14 inch barrel is perfect for an M4 i.e. 2 360s per 7 inches. Most AR-15 are not spec'd to Mil-STD specs. A lot of Ar-15 barrels are like 1:8, 1:9, 1:10, even 1:14.

Same with many guns out there. I would not be surprised if the Beretta M9 or Sig-Saur M17 P320 is spec'd to military metals and military standards for pistols.

Same with bullets the 5.56 used by NATO-US is far more powerful than civilian grade 5.56. Same with the 9MM Mil-Grade 127g-129g bullet with military powder.

So all in all ANY restrictions no matter how light or heavy not only violate the constitution. BUT on top of that hinder civilians from higher quality equipment particularly military-grade equipment and violate the spirit of Military-Civilian cooperation in defense of the Nation.

I would not be surprised if hundreds of millions IF not billions of dollars worth of guns are less than military-standard thus they should be sold cheaper due to lacking in high-quality stuff. That's not to state guns are prone to issues they are simple machines with extreme utility but people want a bang for their buck. And they sure aren't getting the best of the best.

Kinda like my meme that I state the Gods have G.M.I.G. equipment(Godlike-Military-Industrial-Grade) equipment i.e. Vrillya(God-like). And despite being my meme I would NOT be shocked if the Gods demand the best of the best equipment no matter what. Even the cheapest widget used by the Gods is like HOLY FUCKING SHIT this thing feels, weighs, and seems like it's worth a million bucks.

So all in all violation of the constitution = violation of all that is U.S. existence AND on top of that violation of people being able to at least have the best of the best equipment.

Finally in an NS way anti-Assault = Anti-Hitler. As Hitler coined the term Sturm or Storm or Assault Rifle. It's like Hitler ice-cream in India if more people knew anti-Assault or any kind of weapon or gun is akin to being Anti-Hitler.

So I personally believe we should have Military-Spec-STD of guns maximize gun potentiality and not violate the 2A some restrictions for certain bad people but overall most guns are used not just legally but lawfully as per the Nation and it's civilians.

It's like crypto "Oy vey goyim criminals use it let us shekelberg you and shekelsten you so we can dominate you". All a ploy on bullshit to hinder progress and restrict and eliminate rights. And the funny part is the radical left is pro-2A up the ass you can even argue lefty extremists which are more and more common place are SO 2A they outweigh the 2A of right/conservatives. Which is funny because they use it for subverting nation state unto communism and the massacres of people.

In other words Might is Right, when in actuality it should be Right is Right and when Might needs to be activated by the Right. To destroy the extremists and anti-Gentile, anti-U.S. retards that somehow think subverting everything to socialistic-communism is somehow the holy mission and GOOD for us.

It's like the Hitler memes 'You should have listened to me', 'I tried to warn them but they didn't listen', 'I tried to warn them but no one believed me'.

We could have ended this non-sense 80 years ago.
 

Al Jilwah: Chapter IV

"It is my desire that all my followers unite in a bond of unity, lest those who are without prevail against them." - Satan

Back
Top