California tried to outlaw the sale of semiautomatic firearms, but a federal judge decided that the state’s three-decade-old assault weapons ban is unconstitutional.
The Los Angeles Times reports that U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez has ruled that contemporary semiautomatic weapons are frequently employed for self-defense by numerous law-abiding persons and are consequently widespread in homes.
According to the court, even when some people use the same firearms for shootings and other violent crimes, 2nd Amendment rights cannot be curtailed.
“Guns and ammunition in the hands of criminals, tyrants and terrorists are dangerous; guns in the hands of law-abiding responsible citizens are necessary,” the site reported that Benitez wrote.
“To give full life to the core right of self-defense, every law-abiding responsible individual citizen has a constitutionally protected right to keep and bear firearms commonly owned and kept for lawful purposes,” he added.
The Los Angeles Times has more.
Benitez, who gained notoriety with his 2021 decision equating the AR-15 to common knives, has once more decided the future of the legislation in a highly awaited move.
“Like the Bowie Knife which was commonly carried by citizens and soldiers in the 1800s,” Benitez’s latest decision begins, “‘assault weapons’ are dangerous, but useful.”
Although the impact of Benitez’s decision on state gun laws may be significant, it won’t be felt right away. Benitez gave the state a 10-day window to request a stay and submit an appeal of the verdict with the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in his opinion.
REVEALED: The 3 reasons you should NEVER use Vegetable Oils…
The California Attorney General’s Office, which is in charge of upholding the law in court, wasted no time in submitting a notice of appeal. It highlights that the state’s ban is currently still enforceable and in place.
“Weapons of war have no place on California’s streets,” Bonta said in a statement. “This has been state law in California for decades, and we will continue to fight for our authority to keep our citizens safe from firearms that cause mass casualties.”
Ammoland added additional information from Benitez’s decision:
The 79-page ruling by Judge Benitez vehemently criticizes the State’s reasoning for the firearm ban. The Judge rejects the claim that other rifles can be used as appropriate substitutes and cites the Heller decision, which exposed this fallacious justification. This ruling firmly maintains the right to bear guns and rejects any attempts to limit it because there are other options.
According to Heller, it is unconstitutional for the government to use a legal justification for outlawing some firearms while allowing others. The rights guaranteed by the US Constitution do not work like this. It is unacceptable for a state to close synagogues while churches and mosques are open or to forbid the sale of certain literature solely because there are alternatives available. The firearms classified as “assault weapons” and outlawed in California are modern weapons that law-abiding people all around the nation typically own for legal purposes.
It is unlawful to forbid them, according to the seminal Supreme Court cases Heller, McDonald, Caetano, and Bruen.
