Big News in California

digger11

New member





Today at 1:52 PM


















** GUN RIGHTS ALERT **











California Gun Waiting Period Laws
Ruled Unconstitutional



Federal court decides 10-day waiting period laws violate Second Amendment rights

ROSEVILLE, CA (August 25, 2014) – California’s 10-day waiting period for gun purchases was ruled unconstitutional by a federal judge this morning in a significant victory for Second Amendment civil rights. The laws were challenged by California gun owners Jeffrey Silvester and Brandon Combs, as well as two gun rights groups, The Calguns Foundation and Second Amendment Foundation.

In the decision released this morning, Federal Eastern District of California Senior Judge Anthony W. Ishii, appointed to the bench by President Bill Clinton, found that “the 10-day waiting periods of Penal Code [sections 26815(a) and 27540(a)] violate the Second Amendment” as applied to members of certain classifications, like Silvester and Combs, and “burdens the Second Amendment rights of the Plaintiffs.”

“This is a great win for Second Amendment civil rights and common sense,” said Jeff Silvester, the named individual plaintiff. “I couldn’t be happier with how this case turned out.”

Under the court order, the California Department of Justice (DOJ) must change its systems to accommodate the unobstructed release of guns to gun buyers who pass a background check and possess a California license to carry a handgun, or who hold a “Certificate of Eligibility” issued by the DOJ and already possess at least one firearm known to the state.








Under the court order, the California Department of Justice (DOJ) must change its systems to accommodate the unobstructed release of guns to gun buyers who pass a background check and possess a California license to carry a handgun, or who hold a “Certificate of Eligibility” issued by the DOJ and already possess at least one firearm known to the state.

“We are happy that Second Amendment rights are being acknowledged and protected by our courts,” said Donald Kilmer, lead attorney for the plaintiffs. “This case is one more example of how our judicial branch brings balance to government in order to insure our liberty. I am elated that we were able to successfully vindicate the rights of our clients.”

Attorneys Victor Otten of Torrance and Jason Davis of Mission Viejo were co-counsel for the plaintiffs.

“This ruling clearly addressed the issue we put before the court,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb. “We are naturally delighted with the outcome.”

“California gun owners are not second-class citizens and the Second Amendment doesn’t protect second class rights,” noted plaintiff Brandon Combs, also CGF’s executive director. “This decision is an important step towards restoring fundamental individual liberties in the Golden State.”

“This victory provides a strong foundation from which other irrational and unconstitutional gun control laws will be challenged,” concluded Combs. “We look forward to doing just that.”

The court’s decision can be read or downloaded at http://bit.ly/silvester-v-harris-decision.

The Calguns Foundation (www.calgunsfoundation.org) is a 501(c)3 non-profit organization that serves its members, supporters, and the public through educational, cultural, and judicial efforts to defend and advance Second Amendment and related civil rights.

The Second Amendment Foundation (www.saf.org) is the nation’s oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 650,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control.
 
Great news !. Major victory for all USA citizens !
thumbup.gif
 
“California gun owners are not second-class citizens and the Second Amendment doesn’t protect second class rights,”

thumbup1.gif
 
Interestingly, the judge clearly stated that he was not ruling on the constitutionality of the 10 waiting period, even though that's what the original suit was over. Me thinks that the real source of the issue still lies out there restricting Californians, and other US citizens rights.
 
the only possible person a waiting period could have preventative effect is a first time buyer who has malicious intent. everyone else is simply putting up with a hassle.

Once anyone owns a gun, if they want to do something wrong with a gun they now have the means to do so. Being forced to wait on future purchases is just a waste of their time.
 
I wonder if this sets precedent for the 48 hour waiting period on handguns nationwide then? And slowly but surely the silencer issue has to be tackled. Seems they like to limit guns, but not borders and illegal voters. Something has got to give here soon, before all hèll breaks loose
 
Not so fast. The only way to determine a 1st time gun purchase from further gun purchases, is to keep a data base. So the flip side to this is getting to keep an overt gun owner data base, now it's legal. We can look to UK and Australia to fully know that once the govt gets their data base, then gun confiscation inevitably follows.
 
Last edited:
Quote:48 hour waiting period on handguns nationwide

What's that?

I can buy a handgun over the counter in Missouri, and leave as soon as the NIC's check clears, just like a rifle or shotgun.
 
I can buy a handgun over the counter in Arizona, and due to having a concealed weapons permit, I don't even have to go through the NICS check. There is no national 48 hour waiting period. Any delay in getting a firearm is strictly a states requirement.

Na Na nana Na.
 
yeah, I have nary a clue what that "national 48 hr waiting period" is about, there isn't one & never has been one.
 
A person should be able to buy a firearm in a few minutes and immediately start protecting themselves. Bad guys don't require a courtesy waiting period.
 
Back
Top