National Gun Forum banner
1 - 14 of 14 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
22,057 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
A federal judge who last year declared California’s ban on high-capacity gun magazines unconstitutional has just halted another gun-control measure voted in by California voters in Proposition 63: background checks for buying ammunition. The judge also linked freedom to buy bullets to the coronavirus pandemic.

“California’s new ammunition background check law misfires and the Second Amendment rights of California citizens have been gravely injured,” Judge Roger Benitez of Southern California U.S. District Court wrote in a decision Thursday. “Criminals, tyrants, and terrorists don’t do background checks. There is little evidence that pre-purchase ammunition background checking will accomplish the goal and the burden it places on the Constitutional rights of law-abiding firearm owners is profound.”

The law, part of Prop 63’s slate of gun control measures passed by voters in 2016, required background checks with the state Department of Justice for ammunition purchases, to stop purchases by people not allowed to buy bullets because of their criminal record, a restraining order or a mental health order. It was the first law of its kind in a U.S. state.

At the end of his ruling, which granted a preliminary injunction barring California Attorney General Xavier Becerra from enforcing the background-check law, Benitez cited the coronavirus pandemic.
“Courts are limping by while police make arrests for only the more serious crimes,” Benitez wrote. “Maintaining Second Amendment rights are especially important in times like these.”









The case was brought by the California Rifle & Pistol Association and others including an Arizona ammunition vendor. Becerra, in court filings opposing the plaintiffs’ bid for an injunction, argued that the law had proven effective. In the first month after it took effect, it prevented more than 100 people from illegally buying bullets, and by January, more than 750 people not allowed to buy ammunition had been stopped, the filings said. “Countless other prohibited persons were likely deterred from even trying to purchase ammunition that they cannot lawfully possess,” an August filing said.

Becerra’s office said it was reviewing Thursday’s decision, but didn’t disclose whether it would appeal or seek to stay the order, which takes effect immediately at a time when some California gun stores have been ordered shut because of the coronavirus. Among the places where the shops were not deemed essential businesses are Los Angeles and San Jose.

The law requires buyers who already are in the state’s firearm background check database to pay a $1 fee each time they buy ammunition, while others can buy longer-term licenses if they do not have certain criminal convictions or mental health commitments. “Ammunition purchasers must pass an eligibility check that, in the vast majority of cases, delays a purchase by a few minutes,” the state said in court documents.


The Associated Press contributed to this report.








 

· Grand Imperial Poobah
Joined
·
32,975 Posts
Congratulations to the people of California, you got one of your freedoms back.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gvaldeg1

· Registered
Joined
·
22,057 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
April 24, 2020- Attorney General Becerra filed a motion to stay the recent injunction granted in Rhode v. Becerra case just yesterday that allows Californian’s to purchase ammunition from out of state retailers and without a background check.

The Attorney General sought this immediate action because he is afraid that “ammunition vendors have already started selling ammunition without background checks, creating the near certainty that prohibited persons will have access to ammunition.” This is the same argument that the state FAILED to prove during the injunction hearing, but a failed argument is all they have.

Let’s be clear, they have no proof that a prohibited person is purchasing ammunition through the standard channels of buying ammunition, but we do have proof that lawful citizens’ rights are being heavily impacted.

This is just another play in California’s attempt to keep firearms and ammunition out of the hands of those that choose to use their firearm for lawful purposes without having any proof that these kind of laws affect the public safety and prohibit criminals from buying ammunition. The court saw through these shenanigans and has officially DENIED the motion to stay. The order from the court showed an accurate application of the law and the protection of your rights and we are not ready to give that up.

Let the “Freedom Weekend” of purchasing ammunition begin!

CRPA is committed to continuing this fight for you. We are fairly certain that the state will seek a Ninth Circuit Court stay next week. We will keep you informed.

Please support the on-going litigation efforts of the CRPA as we push to make this injunction permanent.
 

· Super Moderator
Joined
·
15,143 Posts
Heard this on the radio this morning on the way to work. Nearly drove off the road cheering.

Best news I've heard in months.

--Wag--
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
9,922 Posts
It’s not about stopping criminals from getting ammo. It’s about making it more difficult to own a gun. All of these regulations are just road blocks to make it all so of an inconvenience and therefore it’s a roadblock as you try to exercise your constitutional rights. They can’t go directly at your rights so they dance around the edges and hope nobody puts up too much of a fight.
 

· Grand Imperial Poobah
Joined
·
32,975 Posts
On to the SCOTUS.
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top