3 ms·
Bruen decision itself is absurd. I don't really care about this law in particular, nor that the court followed the Bruen decision because they don't have much
by duxup 1y ago
Bruen decision itself is absurd.
I don't really care about this law in particular, nor that the court followed the Bruen decision because they don't have much choice.
But this idea that you can't pass a law related to guns because you couldn't point to another law in the past that was passed seems bizarre. So if you pointed to a past law that banned guns in say a school, but not a library ... that's how this works? It makes no sense.
If there's a reason to strike down a law for other reasons, constitutional reasons fine. But the idea that "I think this law is too new" just seems like old man "close the patent office" kinda stuff. Or more likely they just reasoned themselves into the outcome they wanted, forget common sense.
- Alupis 1y agoThis is the 9th circuit - which historically is very anti-2A. This decision is a bit surprising, in a positive way, under that light. I'm not a lawyer, but I believe the challenge was to the infringement on citizen's rights. Many people were barred from purchasing ammunition for legally-owned firearms - which was prohibiting people from exercising their 2A rights. In CA, we already have a 10-day waiting period and background checks on every firearm purchase. Doing another (fallible apparently) background check every time someone purchases ammunition is pretty absurd and discriminatory. Additionally, apparently the State was compiling a database of firearms and calibers - to prohibit you from purchasing ammunition in a caliber they didn't believe you owned (never mind the fact that caliber can be easily changed on many firearms with a few, legal, components you can buy online). For instance, as it was, a friend you were inviting out for a range day was not legally eligible to purchase a box or two of ammunition. Technically, they could not hand you cash for ammo they shoot either... When the law was first implemented, many people who had purchased firearms a decade ago or longer were suddenly prohibited from purchasing ammunition. The backwardness of this law goes on and on... it was an absurd law and I'm very happy to see it struct down. It might also come as a surprise for some... but the actual criminals laws like this target don't go to their local Big5 Sporting Goods to purchase ammo anyway...
- cosmicgadget 1y agoEven better, they classify airports and courthouses as "sensitive" places and schools and outdoor music festivals as not sensitive. Originalism is a sham ideology for ruling their politics. Check out the Rahimi decision and dissent.
- duxup 1y agoOriginalism is an Original idea ;)