Judge rules California's ban on assault weapons unconstitutional

[Bouncer]

Facts.. Not Emotion has won the day..

-----

“One is to be forgiven if one is persuaded by the media and others that the nation is awash with murderous AR-15 assault rifles. The facts, however, do not support this hyperbole, and facts matter.”

“In California, murder by knife occurs seven times more often than murder by rifle,” he added. - Judge Roger T. Benitez.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/05/us/ca...ned/index.html

[Bouncer]

This was always a terrible law. Guns of very specific design were banned, while the same gun with a minor cosmetic change was not. It made no sense. Devices that protect the shooter, such as a suppressor, were banned (if you don’t know, suppressor/silencers don’t actually make a gun quiet like in the movies; they just make it not totally deafening to shoot). The whole thing was poorly written and done so from the obvious perspective of people with zero knowledge of firearms.

We also know from studies that gun bans short of complete and total bans don’t prevent gun violence. And a complete and total ban is impossible at the state level because there are 49 other states. Hell, it’s practically impossible at the federal level, too, because it would take a constitutional amendment and vastly stricter border control. In short, bans are ineffective pipe dreams. Or, perhaps more cynically, bans are a bogeyman made up by the gun lobby to scare fearful people into buying more guns.

Regardless, I’m glad this was struck down. I’d rather have no law at all than an arbitrary and nonsensical law.

[Marshall1019]

This was always a terrible law. Guns of very specific design were banned, while the same gun with a minor cosmetic change was not. It made no sense. Devices that protect the shooter, such as a suppressor, were banned (if you don’t know, suppressor/silencers don’t actually make a gun quiet like in the movies; they just make it not totally deafening to shoot). The whole thing was poorly written and done so from the obvious perspective of people with zero knowledge of firearms.

We also know from studies that gun bans short of complete and total bans don’t prevent gun violence. And a complete and total ban is impossible at the state level because there are 49 other states. Hell, it’s practically impossible at the federal level, too, because it would take a constitutional amendment and vastly stricter border control. In short, bans are ineffective pipe dreams. Or, perhaps more cynically, bans are a bogeyman made up by the gun lobby to scare fearful people into buying more guns.

Regardless, I’m glad this was struck down. I’d rather have no law at all than an arbitrary and nonsensical law.

Yep and yep. Guns are here to stay regardless of their legality. There are too many and just like anything else illegal, it wouldn't be hard to get your hands on one if you had made your mind up that you wanted one (no different than cocaine).

There are lots of great laws on the books already to keep guns and gun owners safe and protected bit the laws aren't enforced always, no different than it's illegal to drink and drive but right now probably 10% of people on your local interstate are drinking a beer as they commute down the freeway.

And the term "assault weapon" is a made up term by politician's to push a political agenda on firearms. No different than "my truth".....there is no my truth.....there is THE Truth and a lie, but not my truth. That's why you can't put this into law when your dealing with a made-up word with a fluid definition from one person to another....just my take.