View Full Version : CA - Complaint filed against California's Certified Handgun Roster!
Rich-D
1st May 2009, 11:36
California' State Law and Regulations pertaining to a "Roster of Certified Handguns "challenged in Federal Court!
http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/pena/Pena-v-Cid-complaint.pdf
Go Folks!
Rich
pdangeruss
1st May 2009, 13:13
California' State Law and Regulations pertaining to a "Roster of Certified Handguns "challenged in Federal Court!
http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/pena/Pena-v-Cid-complaint.pdf
Go Folks!
Rich
If you read this, there are some interesting arguments in it. It does make one wonder though, if this list gets overturned, the frenzy of buying that happened for the election, I think would pale in comparison to Californians' being able to purchase the hand gun of their choice, rather than just pick from a few.
This is good news, but personally, I would have rather seen us take on the California "may issue" CCW system first.
jman527
1st May 2009, 16:03
I agree. I too would like to see California become a "shall issue" state. I would also like to see teachers, college professors and students legally carrying on campus. I don't see that happening any time soon though. But this is a step in the right direction.
kenhwind
1st May 2009, 19:26
Living in FL I have to agree with the shall issue, issue, because that's as it should be in my opinion. the certified handgun list is a bunch of hogwash too IMO
BRSmith
1st May 2009, 20:10
This will be fun to watch, especially since some of these are dealing with differently colored models of approved guns. I want to hear a reasonable explanation of how color changes makes guns unsafe...
...I want to hear a reasonable explanation of how color changes makes guns unsafe...Well you won't because the "different finishes" issue is probably a red herring. Different finishes don't have to be tested. There's an abbreviated listing process for different finishes (see http://www.gun-politics.org/showpost.php?p=1211&postcount=10); and it's basically just a matter of establishing that the gun with the different finish is mechanically the same as the model tested.
The interesting twist is that the law was originally promoted in the Legislature as designed to keep cheap "Saturday Night Specials" out of commerce. But many of the cheap, zinc alloy framed guns that we supposed to be made illegal actually passed testing and got on the list. The other interesting twist is that LEOs are exempt and may be sold guns not on the list. So if the list is really for assuring that handguns in commerce are "safe", the implication is that it's okay for LEOs to have unsafe guns. The State's explanations for these points should be very interesting.
d90king
2nd May 2009, 12:38
This is good news, but personally, I would have rather seen us take on the California "may issue" CCW system first.
+1 on this one! I believe it will be a long hard fight but one that deserves the work that will be needed to overturn the "may" clause. Frank, does California's constitution offer any 2a protection in it?
...does California's constitution offer any 2a protection in it? I'm afraid not.
Rich-D
2nd May 2009, 23:25
Seven states do not have a constitutional provision on arms: California, Iowa, Maryland, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, and Wisconsin. [Source: U. Dayton Law Rev. v.15, pp. 84-89 (1989)]
Rich
d90king
3rd May 2009, 11:16
Interesting that 4 of the 7 have pushed the limits to the brink of violating ones rights under 2a...
Pa's is very strong, it reads "shall not be questioned". Even with that language our "leaders" still do what they can to ignore it. Fortunately to no avail. :appld:
LeftCoastConservative
3rd May 2009, 14:08
The DOJ Roster effects more than California because the new D.C. handgun law also uses the California Roster to limit the guns that are acceptable to register. That law has also been challenged in court, and as it is more advanced, it may be resolved sooner than the California case.
I think both cases are very strong. Read the complaints for both case here:
Hanson et al. v. District of Columbia:
http://saf.org/legal.action/dc.roster.lawsuit/roster_final_complaint.pdf
Pena et al. v. Cid
http://saf.org/legal.action/ca.roster.lawsuit/ca_roster_complaint_09.pdf
These documents are not long, and very clearly written. I think that there is a good chance that the CA Roster will be found unconstitutional.
On a side note, I think CA is being entirely disingenuous about the entire safety aspect. As proof of this I offer the new Microstamping law in CA, due to come into effect in 2010. After January 1, 2010, any handgun that does not microstamp fired cartridges will be "unsafe" and unable to be sold in California.
"Unsafe" for whom?
No, the roster is simply another hoop to jump through for manufacturers, making guns more expensive and harder to obtain, with the intent of making gun ownership so difficult that people will not bother.
Rich-D
3rd May 2009, 14:45
And, I thank you for your input on the matter!
Best of Luck!
Rich
kenhwind
3rd May 2009, 15:45
If any of those YoYos ever read Hatcher's "Testbook of Firearms Investigation,Identification and Evidence" they would realize that firearms DO leave an imprint on the fired case. Its not about safety ,its about creating an enviroment where guns CANNOT be sold.
Hey! That's CA for ya.
Nothing personal against you California gun owners.
Rich-D
3rd May 2009, 16:06
If any of those YoYos ever read Hatcher's "Testbook of Firearms Investigation,Identification and Evidence" they would realize that firearms DO leave an imprint on the fired case. Its not about safety ,its about creating an enviroment where guns CANNOT be sold.
Hey! That's CA for ya.
Nothing personal against you California gun owners.
First, I am against micro-stamping and all of the other measures attempting to be imposed on gun ownership. The fact that guns without micro-stamping leave imprints that can be matched with a certain gun, is an old science. However, one must have a previous sample or sample after the fact of a fired casing from the same gun. Finding spent casings on a scene is the first step. finding the gun it belongs to is the difficult part.
Micro-stamping advocates claim that the imprinted code and a data base would make finding the gun the projectile came from, easily and readily identifiable. They also are proposing identifiable markings on all ammo sold.
I do agree, that the measures are intended to impact negatively on gun and ammunition sales.
Rich
:wc:
...I think both cases are very strong. Read the complaints for both case here...I also think the cases are strong. These are well written complaints. Let me just say however, that if a complaint is well written by a skilled lawyer, the case will always sound strong. And we have some excellent legal talent on our side here.
I'm not tring to be a wet blanket here. But I've found from experience that this sort of thing can be a long, hard fight. If one starts out too optimistic, it's easy to get too discouraged from minor set backs that sometimes arise. We're in a marathon, not a sprint.
Rich-D
4th May 2009, 06:37
We're in a marathon, not a sprint.
And it is so, on the many issues that we face! The opposition is determined and in it for the long haul. We must be even more determined, and eternally vigilant!
Rich
d90king
4th May 2009, 20:05
We should know in 5 or 10 years. ;)
If the imprinting law goes into effect, then anyone with that type of gun better make sure they pick up every spent casing when they shoot. A person up to no-good can get a hold of casings marked with your gun and spread them around a crime scene.
Rich-D
6th May 2009, 00:11
If the imprinting law goes into effect, then anyone with that type of gun better make sure they pick up every spent casing when they shoot. A person up to no-good can get a hold of casings marked with your gun and spread them around a crime scene.
The same goes now! As a casing can be matched to a specific gun. Except that you would have to provide law enforcement with the lead as to who the gun belongs to! With micro-stampng they only need to look it up in the file.
Morale of the story, pick up your brass!
Rich
kenhwind
6th May 2009, 00:16
Pick up what brass you will be using an illegal weapon, that doesn't micro-stamp, Alcatraze for you IMO
Rich-D
6th May 2009, 00:35
Pick up what brass you will be using an illegal weapon, that doesn't micro-stamp, Alcatraze for you IMO
You remove your brass now, before micro-stamping for reloading and/or to deny it's use to anyone with ill intent. If micro-Stamping should become reality, it is even more important that you remove the brass. If it is the firing pin that produces the mark, a new primer takes care of that issue. If the mark is on the casing, one should still be able to reload it!
However in any case, removing the brass would not be a violation of law.
Rich
kenhwind
6th May 2009, 01:06
Won't matter Rich we'll all be shooting serialised ammo anyway. What do they call that stuff, anyway CA would be all for it I'm sure.
kenhwind
6th May 2009, 11:58
If micro-Stamping should become reality, it is even more important that you remove the brass.
Yes for sure, I must have missed that.
Frank
10th May 2009, 04:20
I just occurred to me that I don't know if I can afford for us to win. There may be too many off list guns I'd want. :D :D
Aguila Blanca
16th May 2009, 02:07
The same goes now! As a casing can be matched to a specific gun. Except that you would have to provide law enforcement with the lead as to who the gun belongs to! With micro-stampng they only need to look it up in the file.
Morale of the story, pick up your brass!
Yeah -- and if you're a goblin the moral of the story is, "Pick up some other dude's brass."
vBulletin® v3.0.17, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.