Judge Overturns California's 3-Decade-Old Ban On Assault Weapons
Source: Huffington Post
A federal judge Friday overturned Californias 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 states 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.
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 rulings introduction.
Read more: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/california-assault-weapons-ban-overturned_n_60bb4949e4b0ea8a191ebeaf
This judge is on Senior status, and was originally appointed by George W Bush.
quaint
(2,579 posts)Guns in s state with almost 40 million people has nothing to do with states having populations under a milliion.
Dial H For Hero
(2,971 posts)So in 2 to 3 years, this could well apply nationwide.
Calista241
(5,586 posts)13 judges on the 9th were picked by Trump or W Bush.
Ford_Prefect
(7,919 posts)This guy's reasoning is so far off the standard it is bound to be overturned. He speaks of the AR-15 as if it were a tool like a hammer or a screwdriver. This argument has lost before since it overlooks other features of the law and other rulings. The idea that weapons owners have rights superior to those who do not has lost before, too.
Calista241
(5,586 posts)The normal process for appeals is that this decision will be heard by a 3 judge panel.
The en banq review is a different case. Either appeal will probably wait until the upcoming SCOTUS ruling comes out.
Polybius
(15,476 posts)The judge gave 30 days to appeal.
azureblue
(2,150 posts)is what his "reasoning" boils down to. And his application of the 2nd is flawed, too because, as usual, it omits the "Well regulated militia" qualification for owning firearms. Further, it is obvious he has never shot an AR15 in his life, but he feels qualified to categorize it.
His ruling will get reversed because it has too many holes in it.
Faux pas
(14,690 posts)And
Marthe48
(17,018 posts)fewer assault weapons, not more.
Between covid and crazies with guns, I might never leave the house again.
Thanks for nothing, dumbass.
sinkingfeeling
(51,473 posts)dreamland
(964 posts)elias7
(4,026 posts)Brings up media (dog whistle) hyperbole as if the media is biased in over reporting on mass shootings the past years, while neglecting the opposite gun glorification bias by NRA and social media.
SharonAnn
(13,778 posts)Orrex
(63,224 posts)If not, then the Honorable Roger can go fuck himself.
azureblue
(2,150 posts)and should be applied to all gun nuts in office.
Last time I served jury duty they confiscated my Swiss army knife that I carry all the time.
Orrex
(63,224 posts)Funny how those quickest to pander to gun zealots seldom want those beloved guns close to them.
WA-03 Democrat
(3,054 posts)Every Federal courtroom entrance has at least 2 security guards with an X-ray machine and a metal detector. Try to bring a pistol in and see if they laugh it off. The guards make the TSA folks look meek. They are professional and sometimes friendly but their entire focus is keeping weapons out of the judges house. So the judge can say, no problem with more guns in your house.
Rules for me and rules for thy.
Dial H For Hero
(2,971 posts)It will certainly be appealed to the 9th Circuit, at which point I expect it to be indefinately stayed. At that point I suspect it will be on its way to the Supreme Court.
Calista241
(5,586 posts)AndyS
(14,559 posts)Dial H For Hero
(2,971 posts)This may no longer be the case on this issue.
DetroitLegalBeagle
(1,926 posts)SCOTUS has avoided gun cases until recently. It's been widely speculated that the Heller and McDonald decisions were worded carefully to keep Kennedy on board. Since Kennedy's retirement, Roberts has been seen as unreliable (from a right wing perspective) but now with Barrett on the court, they may feel that they have 5 reliable votes.
patphil
(6,207 posts)Are you F**kin' kidding me?
If that's the grounds for allowing a weapon, they why not have machine guns, mortars, and surface to surface missiles?
The right to bear arms doesn't mean any weapon you choose. It means you can have a gun. It's not an open-ended right.
The second amendment was written when the only guns were muzzle loaders for God's sake.
Lets have a bit of sanity here!
oneshooter
(8,614 posts)That being so, then it only applies to what is written with a quill pen on hand made paper?
patphil
(6,207 posts)There were newspapers, books...all sort of printed material available at the time.
Plus, free speech covers the spoken word as well.
I can forgive our founding fathers their lack of ability to see the future of military weaponry. How were they to know a single person with an assault weapon could kill a dozen or more people in just a couple minutes.
But, today we have the ability to see what is happening all around us, and read what is going on all over the nation.
We know better!
We need to be better. The Second Amendment protects the right to bear arms, but it doesn't say which ones.
I think it's best to put limits on the extent of those arms.
And while we're at it, I think a well-regulated militia is a good definition of the National Guard. These private para-military units that are so prevalent in our county do not meet my interpretation of well-regulated. They should be folded into the National Guard, and come under the control and regulation of the various states.
former9thward
(32,077 posts)The National Guard did not come into effect until the 1880s, almost 100 years after the 2nd amendment was ratified. The founders said the militia was "the whole people".
patphil
(6,207 posts)My point is that the National Guard is well regulated, and these militia groups around the nation aren't. And, they don't represent the whole people anywhere near as well as the National Guard does.
The current state of militia's in this nation are a large number of groups of people pretending to be soldiers. They are essentially partisan in their makeup. They aren't there to protect the nation, or reign in an out of control government. They exist as a means of pursuing their ends up to, and including violence.
None of these groups represents the whole people. In fact, most of them are made up of white men who fear their supremacy is slipping away as the black, brown, and yellow minorities gain in numbers. They're motives are simply self-serving. They want to control the direction and application of governments across the nation at all levels.
I see the National Guard as the logical extension, and replacement for these groups. At least it actually exists to protect the nation, not the narrow self-interests of their members.
LongtimeAZDem
(4,494 posts)DiamondShark
(787 posts)There were newspapers, books...all sort of printed material available at the time.
Plus, free speech covers the spoken word as well.
By that logic, the internet is excluded, broadcast media including radio and TV.
WA-03 Democrat
(3,054 posts)Is a very good weapon for high power and accurate for distant (600 yards) targets. If you shot an AR-15 inside the house, the bullets will not just go through one wall they may do 3 or 4 before it stops. Its easy to operate but in close quarters a long gun is not ideal because of its size. This ruling is not based on fact but on the judges bias.
Dial H For Hero
(2,971 posts)buckshot will also penetrate 4 walls with ease.
ForgoTheConsequence
(4,869 posts)It's generally thought of as not being very useful over 400 meters. Are there versions with longer barrels set up for longer distances? Sure. But it's a tactical gun first and foremost and sometimes classified as a pistol rather than a long gun depending on the setup.
YMB
(63 posts)is more about its versatility as a platform. It is true that a rifle is a bad choice in close combat, but then you can get AR's with an 8" barrel and either no stock or a pistol brace ( essentially turning the whole thing into a "pistol" ) on it significantly shortening its length. With that if youre worried about the 5.56 you can also either get frangible ammo to cut down on over penetration (tho it is extremely expensive and hard to find, especially now) or use one with a pistol lower receiver and shoot something like .45 acp out of it (which is pretty ideal in a HD situation). Even with all that the standard AR15 setup with an adjustable stock and a 16" barrel is not that much of a "long gun" to begin with.
DiamondShark
(787 posts)And if you are using anything but hollow-point in your home for defense, you are doing it wrong.
Paladin
(28,272 posts)How quaint. As if this country's biggest threat is still a foreign nation.
Evolve Dammit
(16,763 posts)oneshooter
(8,614 posts)In the 18th century, as typified by the English Brown Bess musket, loading and firing was done in the following way:
Upon the command "prime and load", the soldier would make a quarter turn to the right at the same time bringing the musket to the priming position. The pan would be open following the discharge of the previous shot, meaning that the frizzen would be tilted forward. If the musket was not being reloaded after a previous shot, the soldiers would be ordered to "Open Pan".
Upon the command "handle cartridge", the soldier would draw a cartridge from the cartridge box worn on the soldier's right hip or on a belt in front of the soldier's belly. Cartridges consisted of a spherical lead ball wrapped in a paper cartridge which also held the gunpowder propellant. The end of the cartridge opposite from the ball would be sealed by a mere twist of the paper. The soldier then tore off the twisted end of the cartridge with the teeth and spat it out, and continued to hold the now open cartridge in his right hand.
Upon the command "prime", the soldier then pulled the hammer back to half-cock, and poured a small amount of powder from the cartridge into the priming pan. He then closed the frizzen so that the priming powder was trapped.
Upon the command "about", the butt of the musket was then lowered and moved to a position against the soldier's left calf, and held so that the soldier could then access the muzzle of the musket barrel. The soldier then poured the rest of the powder from the cartridge down the muzzle. The cartridge was then reversed, and the end of the cartridge holding the musket ball was inserted into the muzzle, with the remaining paper shoved into the muzzle above the musket ball. This paper acted as wadding to stop the ball and powder from falling out if the muzzle was lowered.
Upon the command "draw ramrods", the soldier drew the ramrod from the musket. The ramrod was grasped and reversed when removed, and the large end was inserted about one inch into the muzzle.
Upon the command "ram down cartridge", the soldier then used the ramrod to firmly ram the wadding, bullet, and powder down to the breech of the barrel. The ramrod was then removed, reversed, and returned to halfway in the musket by inserting it into the first and second ramrod pipes. The soldier's hand then grasped the top of the ramrod.
Upon the command "return rammers", the soldier would quickly push the rammer the remaining amount to completely return it to its normal position. Once the ramrod was properly replaced, the soldier's right arm would be held parallel to the ground at shoulder level, with the right fingertips touching the bayonet lug, and lightly pressing the musket to the soldier's left shoulder. The soldier's left hand still supported the musket.
(At no time did the soldier place the musket on the ground to load)
Upon the command "Make Ready", the musket was brought straight up, perpendicular to the ground, with the left hand on the swell of the musket stock, the lock turned toward the soldier's face, and the soldier's right hand pulled the lock to full cock, and grasped the wrist of the musket.
Upon the command "present", the butt of the musket was brought to the soldier's right shoulder, while at the same time the soldier lowered the muzzle to firing position, parallel to the ground, and sighting (if the soldier had been trained to fire at "marks" along the barrel at the enemy.
Upon the command of "fire", the soldier pulled the trigger, and the musket (hopefully) fired. A full second was allowed to pass, and the musket was then quickly lowered to the loading position, butt against the soldier's right hip, muzzle held off-center to the left at about a forty-five-degree angle, and the soldier would look down at his open pan to determine if the prime had been ignited.
Evolve Dammit
(16,763 posts)oneshooter
(8,614 posts)But you must remember that the weapon was a smooth bore, shooting a unpatched. undersized ball. They relied on mass formations shooting at each other, then closing with the primary close combat weapon, the bayonet.
Edit to add- There were probably more deaths caused by the medical practices of the time.
Auggie
(31,186 posts)Latest Wikipedia entry:
Benitez worked in private practice in Imperial County, California, from 1978 to 1997. He was a judge on the California Superior Court from 1997 to 2001, and an instructor for Imperial Valley College from 1998 to 1999.
In 2001, Benitez was appointed by the United States District Court for the Southern District of California to serve as a United States Magistrate Judge. Then, on May 1, 2003, he was nominated by President George W. Bush to a new seat on the Southern District of California created by 116 Stat. 1758. Benitez was confirmed by the United States Senate on June 17, 2004, and received his commission on June 21. He assumed senior status on December 31, 2017.
Judicial opinions
In 2019, Benitez granted summary judgment in a lawsuit against California's ban on large capacity magazines. The opinion addressed the lengthy history of firearms and self-defense rights in America, and the roots in English history. California Attorney General Xavier Becerra appealed the ruling to the 9th Circuit. In 2020, a three-judge panel affirmed Benitez's grant of summary judgment in a 2-1 decision authored by Judge Kenneth Lee. The attorney general requested an en banc rehearing of the case, and on February 25, 2021, the court stated that it would rehear the case.
In 2021, Benitez presided in a lawsuit against California's assault weapons ban. The trial began on February 3. In June 2021, Benitez overturned the three-decade old ban. He ruled that "the state's definition of illegal military-style rifles unlawfully deprives law-abiding Californians of weapons commonly allowed in most other states". 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. Benitez states that the AR-15 is akin to a "swiss-army knife", both being "home-defense weapon[s] and homeland defense equipment".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Benitez
not fooled
(5,801 posts)That explains a lot--many RWNJs running around there--the red interior of California is far different politically from the coast.
mountain grammy
(26,648 posts)when it comes to killing.
groundloop
(11,522 posts)Or are parts of it straight out of a gun catalog? What a pile of bullshit.
ananda
(28,876 posts)Arrgghh
sop
(10,243 posts)to carry an AR-15 and a Glock. Before long everyone in this blood-soaked country will have either been shot, or related to someone who has.
Turbineguy
(37,365 posts)airplaneman
(1,240 posts)I had a large swiss knife on my key chain and a friend had a small swiss knife in his suitcase.
Both my keys and his suitcase went through X-ray. He was caught and searched and the swiss knife confiscated. No one noticed my larger one and I said nothing until we landed and disembarked.
-Airplane
Traildogbob
(8,797 posts)We are all gonna need em after August. Get em while ya can. Fuck apple pie and baseball. AmuKKKa is car racing, wrestling, and ASSault weapons. Ye ha!!!
JohnSJ
(92,390 posts)and republicans(sarcasm), we have judges like this
LiberalFighter
(51,084 posts)and be able to make rulings.
seta1950
(933 posts)What the he**
LittleGirl
(8,291 posts)We need to participate in our Democracy.
How about referendums to vote on.
Making it easier to vote would help too.
This country is f*cked.
jmowreader
(50,562 posts)Judge, the problem is when those guns are used ILlegally.
Bayard
(22,148 posts)If only our founding fathers could have looked into the future.....
Calculating
(2,957 posts)Way more effective than guns
tenderfoot
(8,438 posts)Did you make that up all on your own?
PlanetBev
(4,104 posts)Im so livid right now I can barely think. 🤬
DetroitLegalBeagle
(1,926 posts)But its not guaranteed. The 9th circuit is not nearly as liberal as it used to be before trump. His appointments has shifted the balance to a near 50/50 split between Dem appointed judges and GOP appointed ones. Because of this, there is a good chance that this ruling is upheld on the initial appeal because only 3 judges rule on that. After that is the en banc review that can be requested by the losing side. Due to the size of the the 9th Circuit, they have a limited en banc procedure(I think they still do limited, but maybe this has changed recently). Usually, en banc reviews involve all active judges. With the limited en banc procedure, they only use 11. With the near parity between Dem and GOP appointed judges on the 9th circuit, its very possible that there could be a majority of GOP appointed judges during the en banc review, which could mean that even the 9th Circuit would uphold this. Also, en banc reviews are not guaranteed, there is a chance that it may not even get that far, but the decision to grant a en banc review is decided by majority vote of all active judges, of which Dem appointed ones are in the slim majority. Regardless of how this all plays out, there is a very good chance this winds up before SCOTUS in a couple years.
llashram
(6,265 posts)are preparing for their latest continuing attempt at overturning American democracy. 1860-65, 1/6/2021, August?
Stuart G
(38,443 posts)...All the idiot had to do was....NOTHING!!!
...LEAVE IT ALONE, AND move on...No... so.... immediately the law is changed. Yes, >>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>IMMEDIATELY......................>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What a complete and total........IDIOT!!!!
Fiendish Thingy
(15,656 posts)Mysterian
(4,591 posts)John Brown was correct when he said the nation would not extinguish slavery until it was bathed in blood. I believe the USA will never get civilized gun control, as they have in civilized nations, until we are again bathed in blood.
dalton99a
(81,570 posts)because a projectile is a projectile
heckles65
(549 posts)Last edited Sat Jun 5, 2021, 01:18 PM - Edit history (1)
tell me why we need a gun designed for infantry combat to defend us all?
Calculating
(2,957 posts)It's to punish and subjugate rather than protect and serve
BobTheSubgenius
(11,564 posts)"Good for both home and battle."
"Goes nicely with fatigues, camo or a ghillie suit."
MarcA
(2,195 posts)Actually saw this bumper sticker this week. Guess those who commit gun crimes in the name of "god" or because their "god" told them to, don't really have "god" in their hearts aka no true Scotsman. Didn't say which "god" but from the other stickers it was pretty obvious which one. Wonder what they would think if "God" was changed to "Allah"? Judge is a typical hypocrite who won't let the peons have guns around him of course.
SunSeeker
(51,689 posts)It is not a "defensive wespon." It is an offensive weapon designed to kill as many human beings as possible as quickly as possible. It has no other use, unlike a Swiss Army Knife, which is not even designed to kill humans.
The same asshole overturned CA's large capacity magazine ban in 2017. CA appealed and got his ruling reversed, but now it is set for panel rehearing.
Clearly these gun nut PACs went forum shopping and found their man. They will will make sure he gets all of their cases from now on.
Marrah_Goodman
(1,586 posts)tonekat
(1,820 posts)for the NRA.
sarisataka
(18,770 posts)Last edited Sat Jun 5, 2021, 06:09 PM - Edit history (1)
Gun violence awareness day. People were supposed to wear Orange in support of ending gun violence If people were supposed to wear Orange in support of ending gun violence. Ironically I found this on a gun forum rather than through any gun control source.
If you wonder why the state of US gun laws is what it is, I think that sums it up.
agincourt
(1,996 posts)if the designer of the AR-15/M-16 thought that everybody should own one. That every house should have a couple, "doncha think?".