The federal judge who struck down California’s 32-year-old assault weapon ban has a history of being overturned on gun issues. With the Bay Area still reeling from another mass shooting, critics are hoping for a quick reversal — but with a Supreme Court increasingly open to reconsidering major gun laws, there’s no guarantee of that lasting.
Top-ranking state officials are vowing to quickly appeal the Friday night ruling by U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez that the law limiting semiautomatic weapons violates the Second Amendment. In a 94-page decision, Benitez praised AR-15 rifles, one of the weapons included in the ban, as “good for both home and battle.” The judge, who was nominated by President George W. Bush in 2003, has history of siding with gun rights advocates in cases about background checks, high-capacity ammunition and other Second-Amendment issues that were later overturned or challenged.
“It’s a horrible decision,” said Kris Brown, president of gun control advocacy group Brady, “but it’s also par for the course” with the San Diego judge, she added.
At stake now is the fate of a class of weapons at the center of several of the nation’s deadliest mass shootings, plus the question of how a shifting legal landscape could impact other gun control cases playing out across the country.
FILE - In this Jan. 28, 2013, file photo, firearms training unit Detective Barbara J. Mattson, of the Connecticut State Police, holds up a Bushmaster AR-15 rifle, the same make and model of gun used by Adam Lanza in the Sandy Hook School shooting, for a demonstration during a hearing of a legislative subcommittee reviewing gun laws, at the Legislative Office Building in Hartford, Conn.
Jessica Hill/Associated Press 2013Earlier this year, a federal appeals court moved toward reversing Benitez on a National Rifle Association case involving California’s 2016 voter-approved ban on large-capacity magazines.
With the new case directly challenging the assault weapon ban — and by extension, similar bans in six other states and the District of Columbia — state officials have 30 days to appeal before Benitez’s ruling goes into effect. Brown said she is optimistic that the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals will overrule the decision and restore the restrictions.
The state’s gun rights advocates say they’re ready for the legal battle to continue. Officials at Sacramento gun rights lobbying group the Firearms Policy Coalition said they’re prepared to go to the Supreme Court, if necessary, in a bid to redefine what counts as an assault weapon and loosen gun restrictions.
“The term ‘assault weapon’ has always been an arbitrary label used by anti-gun governments to ban constitutionally protected firearms,” said George Lee, attorney for the Firearms Policy Coalition, in a statement. “This win is a watershed moment for civil rights, and will restore liberty to countless Californians that have been subjected to gross tyranny.”
As it stands, California’s assault weapon ban applies to semiautomatic guns, such as the AR-15, with detachable magazines. Guns in this category can be reloaded faster or more easily used with modifications like forward grips, folding stocks, flash suppressors and shrouds to protect a shooter from burns. The ban, officially known as the Roberti-Roos Assault Weapons Control Act of 1989, was enacted after a Stockton schoolyard shooting with a semiautomatic rifle that killed five children and wounded 29 others.
In the court ruling on Friday, Benitez noted that the Supreme Court has already held that citizens are not free to carry “any weapon whatsoever.” But AR-15 rifles, he argued, are protected by the Second Amendment and have been unfairly maligned as “murderous” weapons.
The Supreme Court ruled in 2008 that the Second Amendment protected possession of handguns at home for self-defense but said it did not apply to “dangerous and unusual weapons,” a category it has not yet defined. The court agreed in April to decide whether California and other states can require permits to carry firearms outside the home.
The AR-15, first developed for military use in the 1950s by gun manufacturer ArmaLite, has become a symbol of gun violence controversy after variations of the model were used in some of the deadliest rampages in U.S. history. That includes a 2017 Las Vegas concert shooting that left 58 dead and the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre of 27 children and school personnel.
“It pulverizes people,” Brown said of the high-velocity weapon that doctors say can leave softball-sized exit wounds. “No one needs an AR-15 to protect themselves.”
Northern California’s most recent mass shootings have involved different semiautomatic weapons, some allowed under current gun laws and some not.
Eva Hernandez, (left) the sister of victim Jose Hernandez, is comforted by Emma Lechenne as they visit a memorial on at San Jose City Hall in wake of Wednesday's mass shooting at Valley Transportation Authority's maintenance yard in San Jose.
Scott Strazzante/The ChronicleIn San Jose last week, a gunman who killed nine co-workers and himself at a San Jose Valley Transportation Authority rail yard used three legally owned semiautomatic handguns, despite a track record of threats and violent behavior, according to law enforcement reports. Two years ago, the 19-year-old perpetrator of a mass shooting at the annual Gilroy Garlic Festival employed an illegal variation of an AK-47 rifle to kill three people and injure more than a dozen others.
After last week’s shooting, state politicians proposed other new checks on gun purchases. Sen. Dave Cortese, D-San Jose, wrote in a letter to Santa Clara County District Attorney Jeff Rosen that officials should expand so-called “red flag” laws that allow for temporary restraining orders or the seizure of weapons from individuals identified as potentially dangerous to the public.
“No family should experience the trauma and pain that families of those who lost loved ones are currently bearing,” Cortese wrote. “More needs to be done so that we don’t lose more lives.”
At the federal level, assault weapons were previously banned by a 1994 law sponsored by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., after a gunman killed eight people at a San Francisco law office the previous year. That ban expired in 2004, and Feinstein has since introduced multiple measures to revive it that have failed to garner sufficient political support.
For Brown, it’s matter of when — not if — the Supreme Court reshaped by former President Donald Trump will strike down a major gun law, whether it’s California’s assault weapon ban or another. For those concerned about that, she said there’s really only one path forward.
“What does it mean?” Brown said. “Vote.”
San Francisco Chronicle staff writer Bob Egelko contributed to this report.
Lauren Hepler is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. Email: lauren.hepler@sfchronicle.com Twitter: @LAHepler
"really" - Google News
June 06, 2021 at 09:24AM
https://ift.tt/34ODcv4
Is California’s assault weapon ban really over? Gun control advocates hope not - San Francisco Chronicle
"really" - Google News
https://ift.tt/3b3YJ3H
https://ift.tt/35qAk7d
Bagikan Berita Ini
0 Response to "Is California’s assault weapon ban really over? Gun control advocates hope not - San Francisco Chronicle"
Post a Comment