Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967

VICTORY~!!! Judge rules on California ammo law

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

WE WIN!!  (For now, anyway!)

 

CRPA WINS PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION CHALLENGING CALIFORNIA’S AMMUNITION RESTRICTIONS

 

More Here:  JUDGE TOSSES CALIFORNIA AMMUNITION PURCHASE LAW

 

Quote

 

U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez of San Diego ruled in favor of the California Rifle & Pistol Association, which asked him to stop the checks and related restrictions on ammo sales.

 

Benitez called the ammunition background check law “onerous and convoluted” and “constitutionally defective.”

 

“Criminals, tyrants, and terrorists don’t do background checks,” he wrote. “The background check experiment defies common sense while unduly and severely burdening the Second Amendment rights of every responsible, gun-owning citizen desiring to lawfully buy ammunition."

 

 Moreover, he ruled that the state's ban on importing ammunition from outside California violates federal interstate commerce laws.

 

 

 

 

  

Edited by Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967
  • Like 11
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Well....

It is still up in the air.  

Wait until after the en banc hearing in the 9th gets through with it.

 

Still, beats a poke in the eye with a cod.

Edited by Subdeacon Joe
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Joe, go to your room.  :lol:

 

I suspect that if they overturned Benitez they're likely to get their hands judiciously slapped.  Again.  

 

And remember... ten of the 29 judges on the Ninth are Trump appointees.

 

Might be be colorful (expect absurd liberal rants), but the good guys should prevail.  :rolleyes:

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for posting that. I've been avoiding anything related to news to try and undamage my calm.

So does this mean that at this very moment we can go and buy ammo without a background check?

Sort of like "Freedom Week" on standard capacity magazines. Or are we still background checking until

this ruling hits the 9th Circus?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Hendo said:

Or are we still background checking until

this ruling hits the 9th Circus?

 

The judge has not stayed his order.

 

Yet.

  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well. Will wonders ever cease? I shall be interested to see what the ninth does with this. They have had some um...personnel changes so we shall see. Ultimately, all of these laws may end up in front of the SC.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Dubious Don #56333 said:

Well. Will wonders ever cease? I shall be interested to see what the ninth does with this. They have had some um...personnel changes so we shall see. Ultimately, all of these laws may end up in front of the SC.

 

I gotta say that I'm dubious,  Don.

 

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Subdeacon Joe said:

 

I gotta say that I'm dubious,  Don.

 

Ah....the old Dubious Ploy.....I've heard of that LOL.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, the downside at the moment is that the online ammo suppliers I used before the law hit the streets are out of what I usually buy.

Prices seem to have increased, too. Stupid Covid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, Dubious Don #56333 said:

Ultimately, all of these laws may end up in front of the SC.

No, they don’t. The Supreme Court “chooses” what cases they will hear. 
 

Edit:

Oops...you said “may”. Sorry...

Edited by Pat Riot, SASS #13748
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, yesterday I got an email from LAX Ammo telling me about this. They also announced a “sale” which included 9mm ammo that’s 8 cents per round higher than the average prices were in January... :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good news for our pards in in communfornia. I don't have confidence in ruling by 9th circus but I hope these victories continue. The totalitarian rulers will certainly try find another way if they don't get what they want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967 said:

Joe, go to your room.  :lol:

 

I suspect that if they overturned Benitez they're likely to get their hands judiciously slapped.  Again.  

 

And remember... ten of the 29 judges on the Ninth are Trump appointees.

 

Might be be colorful (expect absurd liberal rants), but the good guys should prevail.  :rolleyes:

 

Was this judge a Trump appointee? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ramblin Gambler said:

 

Was this judge a Trump appointee? 

 

 

Hon. Roger T. Benitez, Senior Judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of California.

 

Nominated/Appointed by George W. Bush, 17 June, 2004.

 

Assumed Senior Status, December 31, 2017.

 

Born in Havana, Cuba....  

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I reload all of my own ammo, but I feel like ordering something just to support the ruling and because I can haha 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Stay tuned, the sycophant to Gruesom mayor of LA got an emergency injunction or something to re-instate it. The battle ain't over.

Edited by Clay Mosby

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, Clay Mosby said:

Stay tuned, the sycophant to Gruesom mayor of LA got an emergency injunction or something to re-instate it. The battle ain't over.

 

Do you have a link to that injunction?  Does it only apply to Los Angeles or is it statewide?  

Found it over in TEAM SASS:   https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/firearmspolicycoalition/pages/5614/attachments/original/1587793502/2020-4-24-ca9-order-granting-stay.pdf?1587793502

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT KIM RHODE; et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. XAVIER BECERRA, in his official capacity as Attorney General of the State of California, Defendant-Appellant. No. 20-55437 D.C. No. 3:18-cv-00802-BEN-JLB Southern District of California, San Diego ORDER Before: MURGUIA and BENNETT, Circuit Judges. The court has received appellant’s emergency motion for a stay. The request for an immediate administrative stay is granted. The district court’s April 23, 2020 preliminary injunction order is temporarily stayed pending further court order. The court will address the emergency stay motion by separate order.

 

Didn't take Newsom and his Sacramento Reichstag long.

Edited by Subdeacon Joe
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So how long is this expected to take to run it's course?  Seems like we're still waiting for the magazine issue to be resolved.  <_<

 

I'm hoping (aren't we all!) to see Messrs Becerra and Newsom get some comeuppance.  :angry:

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's what I saw this morning on FB..... oh never mind, I see you found it! :D 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.