- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Judge: California law mandating handgun safety features violates Second Amendment
Posted on 3/20/23 at 11:26 pm
Posted on 3/20/23 at 11:26 pm
quote:
A federal judge is blocking a California law that would mandate certain safety features for semiautomatic handguns.
U.S. District Judge Cormac Carney on Monday ruled in favor of the California Rifle & Pistol Association (CRPA) and four individuals who had said the law violates the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms since no new guns being manufactured complied with it, Reuters reported.
The plaintiffs noted that gun buyers in California were de facto limited to purchasing models from before 2013, the year when the law fully took effect.
California’s Unsafe Handgun Act, enacted in 2001, requires new semiautomatic weapons to have an indicator showing when there is a round in the chamber and a mechanism to prevent firing when the magazine is not fully inserted in case to prevent an accidental discharge, according to Reuters.
The state law also requires handguns to implement microstamping, where a serial number will be stamped on each bullet fired.
Carney, who was appointed by former President George W. Bush, also said in his ruling that the state failed to point out any historical parallels for its law, adding that residents “should not be forced to settle for decade-old models of handguns.”
CRPA President Chuck Michel celebrated the court ruling in a statement saying: “If we can hold on to this great Second Amendment win, people will be able to choose from among thousands of the latest, greatest and safest handguns made today.”
Carney noted that the state has 14 days to appeal his ruling, Reuters reported.
LINK
4
Posted on 3/20/23 at 11:28 pm to jatilen
The state cannot bring cases anymore because of Bruen. Gun control is completely over. There is not a single gun control measure that passes history and text.
Posted on 3/21/23 at 1:54 am to jatilen
quote:
The state law also requires handguns to implement microstamping, where a serial number will be stamped on each bullet fired.
Is this even possible to reliably implement?
Posted on 3/21/23 at 3:56 am to jatilen
Instead of being 6 paragraphs down, reporters should identify immediately which president appointed the judge or to be nonpartisan the year appointed. The identification should be made in the first or second paragraph. That way it is easier to identify the judge instead of burying it in the article. It is much the same way a reporter would identify republicans and democrats.
Examples:
A Bush appointed federal judge is blocking a California law that would mandate certain safety features for semiautomatic handguns.
Or
U.S. District Judge Cormac Carney (appointed, XXXX) on Monday ruled in favor of the California Rifle & Pistol Association (CRPA) and four individuals who had said the law violates the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms since no new guns being manufactured complied with it, Reuters reported.
Examples:
A Bush appointed federal judge is blocking a California law that would mandate certain safety features for semiautomatic handguns.
Or
U.S. District Judge Cormac Carney (appointed, XXXX) on Monday ruled in favor of the California Rifle & Pistol Association (CRPA) and four individuals who had said the law violates the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms since no new guns being manufactured complied with it, Reuters reported.
Posted on 3/21/23 at 3:59 am to Tarps99
quote:
orters should identify immediately which president appointed the judge
But judges are unbiased
Politics don't change the constitution
Posted on 3/21/23 at 4:32 am to Herooftheday
quote:
The state cannot bring cases anymore because of Bruen.
Explain?
Posted on 3/21/23 at 4:53 am to LSUGrrrl
The Second Amendment is a Government restriction , barring the Government from making restrictions on letting the people acquire and keep firearms. Sounds like the Government was trying to set restrictions, which the Second Amendment clearly bars them from doing…
Posted on 3/21/23 at 5:51 am to CamdenTiger
Yes, I get all that. I was wondering about this specifically
quote:
The state cannot bring cases anymore because of Bruen.
Posted on 3/21/23 at 6:46 am to SlapahoeTribe
quote:
Is this even possible to reliably implement?
Yes, at the low, low cost of $10 per round. It is an attempt at back door gun control by making ammo too expensive to fire.
Posted on 3/21/23 at 6:56 am to ksayetiger
quote:
But judges are unbiased Politics don't change the constitution
My point is that sometimes I will see the media highlight who appointed the judge in some articles while others it is like trying to find a needle in a haystack.
For example, when a Trump appointed judge did something unfavorable to the leftist agenda, it would be in the headline.
While on the other side, if it was an Obama appointee pushing the leftist agenda they would hide that in the last sentence of the last paragraph.
Posted on 3/21/23 at 7:00 am to LSUGrrrl
quote:
Yes, I get all that. I was wondering about this specifically quote:The state cannot bring cases anymore because of Bruen.
Clarence Thomas wrote the Bruen opinion. In it he stated that when litigating second amendment challenges, the only things that matter are the plain text of the second amendment (e.g. “shall not be infringed”) plus the context of the history and American gun tradition the year the amendment was ratified (1791).
There’s certain forms of legal scrutiny that had been applied to many other cases - particularly intermediate scrutiny. The concept is that they can allow unconstitutional laws as long as it satisfies some government interest. Thomas in Bruen says that’s bullshite. The two step approach of “does it violate the plain text of the constitution” and then “if I does, does it contribute to some government interest” is one step too many.
It’s a damn shame Bruen even had to exist. It’s a shame Thomas had to write that that the government must follow the plain text of the law
. The “two step” approach was insanity. Every single gun law on the books is unconstitutional. NFA, GCA, Brady, and the bureau of AFT are all unconstitutional.
Posted on 3/21/23 at 7:05 am to Squirrelmeister
So far, only new gun challenges are being overturned.
If lefty idiots keep on, older ones like Brady and the NFA from the 30s probably get shot down in the process.
If lefty idiots keep on, older ones like Brady and the NFA from the 30s probably get shot down in the process.
Posted on 3/21/23 at 7:12 am to jatilen
quote:
microstamping
A fricking joke. This is literally "that sounds good so let's make it law" without looking into the reality of it.
Posted on 3/21/23 at 7:18 am to Bard
Honestly, that is 90% of liberal laws.
If birth control were treated like lefties treated guns and ammo, each pill would be $200 each and there would be a limit of six per purchase.
If birth control were treated like lefties treated guns and ammo, each pill would be $200 each and there would be a limit of six per purchase.
Posted on 3/21/23 at 7:50 am to teke184
quote:
NFA from the 30s probably get shot down in the process.
I am not certain my body could handle this happening but I am willing...
Posted on 3/21/23 at 7:50 am to teke184
quote:
So far, only new gun challenges are being overturned.
That’s not necessarily true. Bruen and West Va v EPA will usher in all the old laws being invalidated. True they are targeting the latest laws as they are the easy low hanging fruit, but the Texas suppressor freedom lawsuit and the auto key card lawsuit are both poised to topple the whole NFA.
I think in a couple years we’ll be able to have shotguns and rifles and pistols or whatever length and weight we want with or without suppressors and without forms or tax stamps.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News