California Attorney General Bob Bonta is hoppin' mad after a federal judge in San Diego declared the state's law banning assault weapons to be unconstitutional, and that a 1989 prohibition on certain semi-automatic weapons could not stand in light of a US Supreme Court ruling last year that expanded gun rights.
In a 79-page ruling on Thursday, US District Judge Roger Benitez said that the state's ban deprived law-abiding people from owning semiautomatic firearms like the AR-15 (in certain configurations) is "extreme," and violates the US Constitution's Second Amendment right to "keep and bear arms."
Benitez also (accurately) notes that criminals are already in possession of "assault weapons," and that "Rather than being outgunned, many citizens want these same firearms as a defense against criminal attacks."
Benitez then provided examples of self-defense that are rarely picked up in the media, starting with a pregnant woman in Florida, who was able to defend her home from violent attackers using an AR-15.
According to Benitez, in light of the US Supreme Court striking down New York state's limits on carrying concealed handguns outside the home, that there were "no founding era dead ringers or historical twins" to California's assault weapons ban, and that the state couldn't point to any historical laws before it adopted its ban.
California in 1989 became the first U.S. state to ban assault weapons, acting in the wake of a school shooting that killed five children.
The legal challenge was brought by several California residents who wanted to own firearms like the AR-15 as well as by gun rights groups including the Firearms Policy Coalition, the California Gun Rights Foundation and the Second Amendment Foundation.
Benitez, an appointee of Republican former President George W. Bush, said California's decision to ban assault weapons "creates the extreme policy that a handful of criminals can dictate the conduct and infringe on the freedom of law-abiding citizens." -Reuters
In response to the ruling, AG Bonta fired off an angry letter and filed an appeal, calling Benitez's decision "dangerous and misguided." We expect the state's liberal 9th Circuit Court of Appeals to agree, after which the US Supreme Court will need to weigh in (or not).
Meanwhile, California gun owners aren't exactly overjoyed. As one anonymous user on Calguns.net posted in response:
After Duncan (not to mention Heller, Peruta, Bruen, etc., etc.) talk of this being a win is just delusional. NOTHING has changed for the better. In fact it’s far WORSE.
Can I buy handguns the rest of the nation can? NO.
Can I open carry? NO
Can I carry concealed? NOT AFTER JAN 1, 2024
STD mags? NO
Can I own AR-15s or the like that aren’t bastardized, unsafe, nonstop ugly a*s reminders of our impotence? NO
Can I buy ammo online like I used to? NOT WITHOUT JUMPING THROUGH FFL03+COE HOOPS).
For crying out loud people, we can’t even buy ammo without first asking permission and then having to paying for that permission (background check)!!
What a joke this all is. And there’s so much more I haven’t even thought of. You call this winning? Wake up. I’m done.
