Gun-Friendly California Judge Scores Another 2nd Amendment Case

Discussion in '2nd Amendment' started by 1024Megabytes, Oct 24, 2020.

  1. by Jordan Michaels on October 19, 2020

    Gun-control groups are crying foul as a judge in California is set to rule on the state’s “assault weapon” ban after already ruling against the state’s magazine ban and its background check requirement to purchase ammunition.

    Judge Roger T. Benitez of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California began hearings today for a case challenging California’s ban on so-called “assault weapons.” Benitez has issued pro-gun rulings in two cases in the last two years, and he’s set to rule on another case involving batons, billy clubs, and blackjacks.

    Gun-control groups have taken to the media to decry Benitez’s history of pro-gun rulings.

    “They struck gold with this one judge,” Ari Freilich, state policy director for the Giffords Law Center, told the San Diego Union-Tribune.

    Freilich takes issue with a legal term known as the “related-case rule,” which allows judges to take similar cases to those on which they’ve ruled before. This rule governs courts throughout the country, but the gun-control advocate argues that San Diego’s court doesn’t allow anyone to challenge which judge will hear a particular case.

    “The purpose of the rule is for judges engaged in complex cases really drilling into the issues, and not having to reinvent the wheel on a really similar case,” Freilich said. “This has been taken to an illogical extreme now when one judge is ruling on everything touching upon gun violence in the state of California.”

    Everytown for Gun Safety’s Eric Tirschwell also complained to the Union-Tribune about Benitez’s rulings.

    “(Benitez) reads the Second Amendment more broadly than just about any other court in the country,” Tirschwell said. “And he regularly adopts the language and tone of the gun lobby. His decision on Second Amendment issues often read more like what an advocate would write and not what would you expect from a neutral dispassionate judge.”

    President of the California Rifle & Pistol Association C.D. Michel dismissed the gun-ban lobby’s claims as nothing more than sour grapes.

    Read more at:
  2. "His decision on Second Amendment issues often read more like what an advocate would write and not what would you expect from a neutral dispassionate judge.”

    So when we do what the Progressives have been doing for over fifteen years in the courts they cry foul. Too bad. This is hopefully another win for liberty.
    Rabidwookie, Hipointer, Zorba and 3 others like this.

  3. ajole

    ajole Supporting Member

    NE Utah
    Good. SOMEONE in the system needed to stand up against the people that want to limit rights in direct contravention of the Constitution.

    I’d argue he’s not reading it more broadly. He’s reading it literally, and following both the intent and letter of that law. Seems almost laser focused to me.
  4. lklawson

    lklawson Staff Member

    Saint Benitez.

    Peace favor your sword (mobile)
    Rabidwookie and Hipointer like this.
  5. Rachgier

    Rachgier Administrator Staff Member

    But if he had gone the complete opposite direction with his rulings, they would be singing his praises.

    Definitely a bunch of sour grapes.
  6. Hipointer

    Hipointer Member

    Finally, something positive out of Kalifornia.
    1024Megabytes and Rabidwookie like this.
  7. Yes and they're the same people who march against wasizm while calling black cops the "N"-word.
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 26, 2020