California Handgun-Microstamping Law Upheld by US Judge

Discussion in '2nd Amendment' started by Rachgier, Feb 27, 2015.

  1. Rachgier

    Rachgier Administrator Staff Member

    California Handgun-Microstamping Law Upheld by US Judge

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-02-27/california-gun-microstamping-law-is-upheld-by-federal-judge

    (Bloomberg) -- California’s ban on new semiautomatic handguns that don’t stamp identifying information on the cartridge was upheld by a U.S. judge in a major loss for gun-rights groups.

    The law barring sales of handguns without the microstamping technology doesn’t violate the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment because gun owners don’t have a right to buy specific types of firearms, U.S. District Judge Kimberly Mueller in Sacramento said in her ruling.
    “Plaintiffs insist they have the right to determine the precise way in which they would exercise their Second Amendment rights,” Mueller said. The insistence upon particular handguns falls “outside the scope of the right to bear arms,” she said.

    California in 2013 became the first state to bar retailers from selling new models of semiautomatic handguns not equipped to imprint the weapon’s make, model and serial number on the cartridge when a bullet is fired. The statute was supported by law enforcement because it can help deter or solve crime.

    About 1.5 million handguns were legally sold in California since opponents sued in 2009 to block the microstamping requirement.

    Calguns Foundation Inc. and the Second Amendment Foundation argued that the requirement amounts to a de facto ban on sales of new semiautomatics because several manufacturers said they wouldn’t produce guns that included microstamp technology even if it meant their firearms couldn’t be sold in California, the most populous U.S. state.

    Groups Appealing

    The two gun rights groups said in a court filing Thursday that they will appeal the ruling from earlier that day. The case may go all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, which in 2008 upheld individuals’ right to own handguns, calling them the “quintessential self-defense weapon.”

    The 2008 high court ruling left room for gun-control backers to impose new rules to promote safety. California, New York and Maryland, among other states, enacted restrictions that U.S. gun manufacturers and retailers contend are intended to regulate their $14 billion industry out of business.
    The California law was signed in 2007 by then-Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, a Republican, and was put on hold until 2013 when the state attorney general determined the technology was available to all gun makers, unencumbered of any patent claims.

    Alan Gura, a lawyer representing the gun-rights advocates, didn't immediately respond to phone and e-mail messages Friday seeking comment on the ruling.

    The case is Pena v. Cid, 09-cv-01185, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of California (Sacramento).
     
  2. GLUGLUG

    GLUGLUG Supporting Member

    769
    5
    NC
    so by the ruling that the insistence to buy a particular type of handgun is not covered by the 2nd, could mean that wanting to buy a handgun that fired at all wouldn't be covered....right....
     

  3. Think1st

    Think1st Supporting Member

    8,809
    2,278
    Florida
    So if I want to use a particular kind of computer to write a blog, the First Amendment doesn't protect the right to write a blog with any computer I choose? If I want to read a certain book, the First Amendment doesn't protect my right to read just any book I choose?

    These First Amendment examples are just as ludicrous as this wingnut excuse for a judge used to uphold her ruling.

    This will be overturned.
     
  4. Rachgier

    Rachgier Administrator Staff Member

    Exactly, according to these morons you can own a gun, but you're not allowed to pick which one, or have a decent selection to choose from.
     
  5. cicpup

    cicpup Resident PITA Supporting Member

    15,755
    5,469
    Vermont
    So when Cali is completely unarmed, will the neighboring states invade or will we just let Mexico have it?
     
  6. SteveC

    SteveC Member

    1,782
    0
    WV
    I vote for Mexico. Sooner rather than later.
     
  7. She was appointed by Barack Obama, there was no way she was going to rule against the law.
     
  8. RedRaptor22

    RedRaptor22 Member

    427
    1
    Hmm, wonder if they'll refuse the selling of handguns to agencies in california too?
     
  9. Bamaboy

    Bamaboy Member

    1,071
    0
    1.Its an Infringement and thats wrong .
    2.Its stupid andd what we expect from the anti gun tards out west.
    And yes its 100% true it won't stop any crime or save one life.
    3.Best of all I'm sure the bad guys are throwing their stolen guns away right now so they are compliant with this law, cause we all know how bad guys worry about all those gun laws and being legal!
    4. I do have a right/freedom to decide what I wear,drive and which gun I purchase you robe wearing commie idiot poor excuse for a judge!
    5. Bad guys will now police up their brass or use revolvers.
    6. Thank GOD I live not there.
     
  10. planosteve

    planosteve Lifetime Supporter

    Ok Bamaboy tell us how you really feel. ;):D Oh wait if you did that you would get banned from the forum, so I guess discretion is the better part of valor.
     
  11. ajole

    ajole Supporting Member

    34,524
    10,762
    NE Utah
    If I were a gun maker, I'd quit selling any guns in California...well, I guess I'd have to, since making them with a micro stamped firing pin is basically impossible.:rolleyes:

    So the question is...do police have to use guns based on the law?

    I'd either refuse to sell to them, too, or I'd charge them $5,000 per gun. Wi
    Even without the stamping. Tell them it's required so I can do research to meet their stupid law.:rofl:

    Seriously. I'd take the loss. Heck, it might increase sales elsewhere.
     
  12. moona11

    moona11 King of you Monkeys Lifetime Supporter

    Bet it would to.
     
  13. I guess we know the reason that building your own Colt .45 autos using 80% receivers has become more popular in the last couple of years.
     
  14. Revolvers are going to get real expensive in CA...
     
  15. USMC_VET

    USMC_VET Supporting Member

    Not only do we have to worry about micro stamping on handguns in Calif we have another law . All Handguns need to have loaded chamber indicators or pop up flags that indicate a rd is in the chamber

    All Handguns prior to this ruling are not legal for sale in Calif . This is for brand new handguns only
     
  16. Rachgier

    Rachgier Administrator Staff Member

    Is that how they finalized the wording? One of my buddies out in Big Bear was saying he thought it meant that anything already on the approved list was grandfathered until it fell off the list for whatever reason, and all NEW submissions had to comply with the microstamping and loaded chamber thing.
     
  17. monsterdawg

    monsterdawg Member

    992
    0
    Couldn't a person just change the firing pin? It says they can't be sold, doesn't say they can't be owned, unless I am misinterpreting it.
     
  18. shepherd321

    shepherd321 Supporting Member

    1,695
    609
    or plant range brass at a crime scene.
     
  19. USMC_VET

    USMC_VET Supporting Member


    Law is only pertaining to new handgun purchases