I see that someone in the Golden Shower State has come to their senses:
The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued a mandate Thursday overturning California’s “one-gun-a-month” restriction.
The Second Amendment Foundation noted the “one-gun-a-month” restriction allows law-abiding citizens to purchase only one handgun or semi-automatic centerfire rifle (or combination thereof), from a licensed dealer within a 30-day period.
Here’s the thing about this ridiculous law.
Quite apart from its prima facie Constitutional illegality, the 30-day restriction just makes absolutely no sense — I mean, what are they trying to achieve (other than a broad restriction, of course)? Are they trying to stop someone from arming a group or gang? (I know, nonsensical.)
As with all laws like this, it should be looked at as part of a whole. What is intended is to make a thicket of laws like this so that the breaking thereof becomes an inevitability — and the side-benefit (to the anti-gunners) is that the people most likely to fall foul of this nonsense would be gun owners. (We always talk about lawful or law-abiding gun owners, but what we sometimes forget is that to the anti-gun set, all gun owners are evil, and not just the criminals.)
Anyway, it’s gone away, and good riddance. Best of all is that because of this ruling, it’s going to apply to any and all other states who have similar nonsense in their raft of laws; and all that’s left is for the SAF guys bring suit in each of them.
Go to it, guys.
Side note: I have more than one friend who won’t give money to any gun lobbying group like the NRA or even GOA. But they give lots to the Second Amendment Foundation because Alan Gottlieb and his guys are doing the work where it matters most: in the courts.
Think about it.
SCOTUS should take several of these gun cases and decide once and for all if the Second Amendment means what it says or not.
Where’s the profit in that?
The courts are a crock just like the rest of government.
The act of “attempting” to violate the Constitution should be a felony.
IOW, if anyone is considering any method of rule making or modification should be required to do the research necessary to make sure they are NOT violating the Constitution.
Sort of like the idea that, if you try to physically harm me I am justified in immediately blowing your head clean off boy.
You don’t get to harm me first, then later the courts determine that you were wrong. That would place the rights of the harmer over the rights of the harmed. Even a 5 y.o. can understand this.
I think the BEST part of this ruling is A) it comes out of the 9th Circus, the most overturned court in the nation, and B) it’s a slap in the face of all the anti-gunners in Cali. Startin g Monday with a smile here, boss!
Add me as one of the people who don’t give $$$ to the NRA. Even though I’m a lifer, the LaPierre’s have enough dough without me adding to it.
The NRA is a lot like the Republican Party….occasionally they do something good, but its usually by accident rather than intent. At least they help bully said “Republicans” into something not “common-sense-gun-control” related.