Wednesday, August 17, 2022
62.2 F
Oxnard
More

    Latest Posts

    United States Socialist Republic book by HG Goerner

    California gun laws face legal assault

    Sponsored - Job Posting

    We are a small but mighty business in Ventura, CA specializing in Civil/Agricultural Engineering and Land Surveying. Going strong for over 35 years. Looking for motivated team players for immediate hire. Candidates must have at least 3 years of experience in Civil Engineering, Land Surveying, and AutoCAD Civil 3D. Must want to grow with the company. For the right person, management potential. Wages will depend on experience. Benefits include paid holidays, matching retirement plan & much more. Send resumes to: [email protected]

    YCE, Inc. is an Equal Opportunity Employer. Tel: 805-650-6995www.YCEinc.com

    Gov. Gavin Newsom, Attorney General Rob Bonta and other California politicians are incensed that the U.S. Supreme Court struck down New York’s law imposing tough limits on concealed weapons permits.

    They know that by invalidating New York’s requirement that permit applicants demonstrate good cause, the court also made California’s similar requirement unconstitutional.

    Newsom branded it a “reckless decision” and pledged that California “will continue to lead in the fight to keep our people safe. Next week, I will have 16 new gun safety bills on my desk, including a bill that will allow individuals to sue gun makers and distributors for violating certain gun laws. I look forward to signing all of those bills.”

    Bonta advised law enforcement officials that they could no longer demand that applicants have an acceptable cause. However, he also – at great length – told them that applicants still could be required to demonstrate good moral character, which may open a new legal front in the perpetual gun control conflict.

    The pro-gun rights Firearms Policy Coalition immediately warned Bonta that wholesale use of good moral character to deny permits violates the Supreme Court’s newly adopted standard and would lead to “far more Second Amendment claims than they have ever faced.”

    A few days after issuing its landmark New York decision, the Supreme Court dropped another bombshell, telling appellate courts that its new interpretation of the Constitution’s “right to bear arms” clause will invalidate other lower-court rulings upholding state gun control laws. They include Maryland’s ban on “assault weapons” that’s similar to California’s law and a California law that bans firearm magazines holding more than 10 rounds.

    The twin actions could wipe out major elements of California’s strictest-in-the-nation regime of gun laws, because of a key legal point in the Supreme Court’s New York decision known as the “two-step approach.”

    In upholding gun control laws, appellate courts often concede that the Constitution protects the right to bear arms (step one) but then conclude that the laws are justified by the need to protect people from harm (step two).

    “Today, we decline to adopt that two-part approach…” Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in the majority opinion. “Despite the popularity of this two-step approach, it is one step too many.”

    Thus it imposes a much higher constitutional standard for gun control laws. It could, for instance, invalidate the “good moral character” factor that Bonta is now touting because it’s not an objective factor such as having a criminal record or being the subject of a restraining order.

    All in all, the Supreme Court leaves California’s vast array of gun control laws in flux and despite Newsom’s pledge to find ways to pursue new regulations, it’s likely that there’s room for maneuver only on the margins.

    The centerpiece of the 16 new gun control laws Newsom plans to sign would allow private citizens to sue makers of illegal guns, such as the unregistered “ghost guns” that are assembled from parts and peddled on the black market.

    Good luck on that. The deep-pocketed major arms manufacturers don’t sell illegal guns and those who assemble them in their garages won’t attract the attention of personal injury lawyers because they offer scant monetary returns.

    Another bill would ban gun shows on state-owned property but that’s just political symbolism. Gun show promoters can easily find other venues, so the main effect of the legislation will be to deprive financially strapped local fairgrounds of rental income.

    It’s a new day for gun control in California “whether you like it or not,” to borrow a phrase that Newsom once uttered in another context

     


    TELL YOUR FRIENDS ABOUT CITIZENS JOURNAL  Help keep us publishing –PLEASE DONATE

    - Advertisement -

    2 COMMENTS

    0 0 votes
    Article Rating
    Subscribe
    Notify of
    guest

    2 Comments
    Newest
    Oldest Most Voted
    Inline Feedbacks
    View all comments
    Bruce Boyer
    Bruce Boyer
    1 month ago

    The Dems wish to die on the hioll of gun control. great! Lets help them!

    C. Collier
    C. Collier
    1 month ago

    If California is so worried about the “safety” of the residents, they should become either a “shall issue” or constitutional carry state.

    Latest Posts

    advertisement

    Don't Miss

    Subscribe

    To receive the news in your inbox

    2
    0
    Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
    ()
    x