California’s 2019 law, disallowing individuals under 21 from purchasing semi-automatic (which are not fully automatic) violates the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on Wednesday.
“America would not exist without the heroism of the young adults who fought and died in our revolutionary army. Today we reaffirm that our Constitution still protects the right that enabled their sacrifice: the right of young adults to keep and bear arms,” wrote Judge Ryan Nelson, who was named to the court by none other than former President Donald J. Trump.
The board reversed a district court ruling, saying that it “erred in not enjoining an almost total ban on semiautomatic centerfire rifles,” as per the assessment.
The case in question, Jones v. Bonta was brought before the watchful eye of the court by the Firearms Policy Coalition, a second amendment backing association, which hailed the court’s decision in a statement.
“Today’s decision confirms that peaceable legal adults cannot be prohibited from acquiring firearms and exercising their rights enshrined in the Second Amendment,” FPC Vice President of Programs Adam Kraut said. “We are pleased to see progress on this important legal front and optimistic that similar results will come from our many other challenges to age-based bans filed in courts across the United States.”
California Attorney General Rob Bonta, who defended the law in court, said in a proclamation that his office is investigating the decision.
“California will continue to take all necessary steps to prevent and reduce gun violence. We remain committed to defending California’s ‘common sense’ gun laws, which save lives and make our communities safer,” Bonta’s office said.
In 2019, California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed Senate Bill 61 into regulation. The bill explicitly prohibited individuals under the age of 21 from having the option to buy semi-automatic centerfire rifles, with the exception for members of active-duty military or law enforcement.
“Gun violence is an epidemic in this country, one that’s been enflamed by the inaction of politicians in Washington,” Newsom said in a statement at the time. “While Washington has refused to act on even the most basic gun safety reforms, California is once again leading the nation in passing meaningful gun safety reforms.”
This is great when you consider that every year, 400,000 life threatening crimes are prevented with the utilization of firearms to protect the owners. 60% of convicted felons admitted that they would avoid committing crimes against people who they knew were armed. Now, they say that they would like to take the guns out of the people’s hands with the mindset that if there’s no guns, there’ll be no gun related deaths or crimes. However, that’s the furthest thing from being true. Criminals would stay criminals and wouldn’t follow any new laws that passed prohibiting law-abiding citizens from purchasing firearms.
Even if we entertain the thought of there being absolutely no guns on earth, we’d still have some issues. The mass majority of gun related deaths would still exist because they’re related suicides, unfortunately. The problem wouldn’t be solved there, and crimes using firearms would still happen because the criminal’s intent is still there, and they’ll reach to grab that goal be it a firearm or any other item, even something as small as a stone. By that logic, should we ban stones and rocks as well? Adding to that, it’d take away from the 400,000 lives that were saved using firearms each year. When you start to look at factual data and stats, these “common sense” claims begin to not make much sense at all.
This story syndicated with permission from Omar, Author at Trending Politics
"*" indicates required fields
