California judge rules that residents have right to ‘state-of-the-art’ handguns

Handgun
David Foley holds a handgun while shopping at the Spring Guns and Ammo store Monday, Jan. 4, 2016, in Spring, Texas. (David J. Phillip/AP)

California judge rules that residents have right to ‘state-of-the-art’ handguns

A California judge ruled that residents have the right to “state-of-the-art” handguns for self-defense.

In California Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bonta in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, Judge Cormac J. Carney granted a preliminary injunction against California’s handgun roster, instituted through the state’s Unsafe Handgun Act.

JUDGE UPHOLDS SUPREME COURT PRECEDENT BY BLOCKING CALIFORNIA HANDGUN SAFETY RULE

In the ruling, obtained by Breitbart, Cormac wrote that the roster was not in line with the government’s tradition of regulations, and it had so limited Californians to what guns they could purchase that residents had to resort to models over 16 years old.

Overall, the judge ruled that the roster violated the Second Amendment.

“Californians have the constitutional right to acquire and use state-of-the-art handguns to protect themselves. They should not be forced to settle for decade-old models of handguns to ensure that they remain safe inside or outside the home,” Carney wrote.

Video Embed

“But unfortunately, the UHA’s CLI, MDM, and microstamping requirements do exactly that. Because enforcing those requirements implicates the plain text of the Second Amendment, and the government fails to point to any well-established historical analogues that are consistent with them, those requirements are unconstitutional and their enforcement must be preliminarily enjoined,” he added.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

Carney dismissed arguments that gun regulations should only be concerned with public utility, saying instead that they had to be in line with the Constitution and traditional regulations.

“To justify its regulation, the government may not simply posit that the regulation promotes an important interest. Rather, the government must demonstrate that the regulation is consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation,” he said.

© 2023 Washington Examiner

Related articles

Share article

Latest articles