California: Injunction Filed to Stop California Ammunition Sales Restrictions

[Charlie T Waite]

On Monday, July 22, CRPA with support of NRA, filed a motion requesting an injunction against enforcement of California's recently implemented ammunition laws. The injunction is part of the case Rhode v. Becerra, filed in April of 2018, where lead Plaintiff and gold medal Olympian shooter Kim Rhode and other Plaintiffs have asked the court to halt enforcement after a dubious roll out of the new law on July 1st.  

The entire system has been shown to be an unconstitutionally excessive burden on law-abiding gun owners with little to no law enforcement value. California ammunition retailers were given little if any guidance from the state explaining the procedures for processing ammunition sales, amounting to mass confusion throughout the state.  

If the court grants the Plaintiffs’ request, it will prohibit California from enforcing its ammunition sales restrictions while the Rhode case is fully litigated. A hearing on the Plaintiffs’ request is currently scheduled for August 19. A decision is expected sometime thereafter. 

NRA and CRPA thank Able’s Ammo of Huntsville, Texas, and Ammunition Depot of Boca Raton, Florida, for their continued support of the Rhode lawsuit and support in filing the request for an injunction. NRA and CRPA would also like to thank the countless individuals and businesses who reached out, as well as the following California ammunition retailers who supported Monday’s filing by providing declarations regarding the effect California’s ammunition sales restrictions have had on their businesses: 

Turner’s Outdoorsman (27 state-wide locations)

LAX Ammunition OC (Huntington Beach)

Norco Armory (Norco)

Foothill Ammo (Shingle Springs)

Guns, Fishing and Other Stuff (Vacaville)

Royal Loan (San Diego)

Mosquito Creek Outfitters (Placerville)

Discount Gun Mart (San Diego and Santee) 

Continue to check your inbox and the California Stand and Fight webpage for updates on the Rhode case as well as other issues impacting your Second Amendment rights and hunting heritage in California.  

[Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967]

Thank you, Charlie....

 

Watching anxiously!  I can't say I'm confident, but definitely hopeful.  

[Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967]

On 7/24/2019 at 5:40 AM, Charlie T Waite said:

On Monday, July 22, CRPA with support of NRA, filed a motion requesting an injunction against enforcement of California's recently implemented ammunition laws. The injunction is part of the case Rhode v. Becerra, filed in April of 2018, where lead Plaintiff and gold medal Olympian shooter Kim Rhode and other Plaintiffs have asked the court to halt enforcement after a dubious roll out of the new law on July 1st....

  

A hearing on the Plaintiffs’ request is currently scheduled for August 19. A decision is expected sometime thereafter. 

 

 

Tomorrow's the day.

 

Cross your fingers and say a prayer or two....   

[Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967]

Anyone have any idea on how this went... or even how to go about finding updates or other information?  

[Sedalia Dave]

Found this

https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?p=23327324

 

[Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967]

3 hours ago, Sedalia Dave said:

Found this

https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?p=23327324

 

 

Dave, your Google-Fu is strong today.  Thank you!  That is exactly what I was looking for... and more importantly, the content is encouraging indeed. 

 

A long read, but good.  It seems the judge is quite perceptive, with observations bordering on astonishment that of over fifty thousand ammunition purchase attempts, about ten thousand were rejected - and the state boasts about a hundred or so "restricted persons" being stopped.  

 

He picked up on the absurdity of not being able to pass the eligibility check if you haven't bought a firearm in the last five years - he made an example of a hunter who bought his one rifle or shotgun in 2002 would have to pay $19 for the "enhanced" background check, which could take ten days.

 

And he pointed out the inequities with out-of-state shooters/hunters - not allowed to buy ammo here.  The state essentially said that they should have researched our laws and planned better - judge didn't seem to buy that.  Then the state said the out-of-stater can hand someone money to make purchases for them.  The STATE actually recommended "straw purchases" for out-of-state shooters!

 

On balance, the reports seem to indicate that the judge was pretty unimpressed with the state's case.

 

But, a decision could be 90 days out or more, depending on the state supplying the requested documentation on the rejected transactions - and, of course, we can count on mister newsom's minions appealing to the ninth - "who never met a gun law they didn't like."

 

Fingers crossed!  

 

[Sedalia Dave]

7 hours ago, Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967 said:

Fingers crossed!  

 

Mine too

[Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967]

The hearing and request for a "temporary  was August 19.  Today is November 19.  It's been three months.  Is there an end in sight...?  

 

And the state seems to be digging in hard:  Mayra G Morales

 

Good grief.  Can we say "disenfranchisement via obfuscation?"