Defensive Carry banner

1 - 20 of 22 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
379 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
San Francisco handgun ban thrown out by Calif. Superior Court.:banana:
See details below from Second Amendment Foundation.
Chalk up one for the good guys!:congrats: :congrats:



NEWS RELEASE
SAF CELEBRATES SAN FRANCISCO COURT VICTORY
BELLEVUE, WA – The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) said today’s decision by the Superior Court in San Francisco to throw out that city’s handgun ban was a victory for gun owner rights all over the Golden State.

“The right of citizens to be safe in their homes and communities can never be subject to a popular vote,” said SAF founder Alan Gottlieb. “This ruling shows that the politicians who pushed this gun ban were wrong.

“It is astonishing that in a city where the leaders preach how open they are to diversity, they encouraged voters to blindly march to the polls last November to practice a blatant, egregious and despicable form of social bigotry against their neighbors and fellow citizens,” Gottlieb observed. “Working to deprive others of their property and their right to self-defense just because you don’t like firearms is morally repugnant, and with today’s ruling, the people who pushed Proposition H last fall should feel ashamed of themselves.

“Today’s court decision to essentially nullify the election was predictable because state law clearly prohibits the adoption of local gun control laws, no matter what the process,” he added. “The Second Amendment Foundation fought this battle and won more than two decades ago. We’ll fight it again tomorrow if necessary.

“It’s one thing to make a political or social statement,” Gottlieb stated, “and San Francisco is famous for that sort of thing. But when making such a statement crosses the line of state law and the fundamental right of self-defense, not to mention depriving citizens of their personal property, the only responsible course is to stop such nonsense.

“We’re proud to have worked once again with the National Rifle Association, to protect the rights of law-abiding citizens, as we did in Louisiana last year to stop gun confiscations following Hurricane Katrina,” Gottlieb concluded, “and we’re delighted to have been joined by the Law Enforcement Alliance of America and California Firearms Retailers Association. The good citizens of San Francisco and their elected leaders should devote their time to more worthwhile endeavors.”

-END-
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,868 Posts
Finally....a reasonable decision coming out of CA regarding firearms!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,488 Posts
Since I only live about 2 hours from San Francisco, I guess I can go there again. But why?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
25,483 Posts
Well - seems common sense has prevailed - as well as a smidgeon of respect for the 2A.

Shucks tho - this should never have something that had to be fought or go to court - geez. :rolleyes:

Be good to see some other less than helpful CA gun attitudes softened or broken too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,741 Posts
Thanks SAF. Never thought I'd see a sensible decision come out of a CA court again, but there ya go...

And to those who think others' self protection is something you get to control-->:nutkick:
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
19,004 Posts
Wow, glad to hear some common sense and gun right protection coming down from the Supreme Court.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,862 Posts
Well the local chapters of the "Pink Pistols" will be happy!! They can enjoy both their pastimes (hopefully not at the same time....)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,850 Posts
Good to read that the judge followed constitutional law, not the ultra-extremists in San Francisco politics.
 

·
1943 - 2009
Joined
·
10,368 Posts
This is good news on the surface, but we haven't heard the last of this yet, folks. Count on it.

The pols in 'Frisco have already shown they don't give a damn about their citizens' gun rights, and they sure don't care if they waste taxpayer money on frivolous litigation.

Remember, this is a state court ruling. This is headed to the Federal appeals court level, without a doubt. Guess where the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals is based? Yep, San Francisco.

Not trying to rain on anybody's parade here, but the opera ain't over 'til the fat lady sings.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
20,045 Posts
Wow, that is a victory, but a suprising one. At least they recognize their own constitutional issues or did this once.....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
49 Posts
Captain Crunch is right on the mark! The ninth circuit court would love to take on this case. Wanna guess the outcome?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
277 Posts
Well, maybe the war isn't over yet, but we sure won a battle. :nutkick:

Even if we lose in the ninth circuit we will at least have demonstrated that we will not accept such legislation without a verdammt good fight. And even then only until the next elections.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
136 Posts
Now lets hope that San Francisco Supervisor CHRIS DALY that proposed the ballot initiative for the ban NEVER gets elected to public office again!!!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
64 Posts
Captain Crunch said:
This is good news on the surface, but we haven't heard the last of this yet, folks. Count on it.

The pols in 'Frisco have already shown they don't give a damn about their citizens' gun rights, and they sure don't care if they waste taxpayer money on frivolous litigation.

Remember, this is a state court ruling. This is headed to the Federal appeals court level, without a doubt. Guess where the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals is based? Yep, San Francisco.

Not trying to rain on anybody's parade here, but the opera ain't over 'til the fat lady sings.
I doubt that this case is appealable to federal court. Federal courts have limited jurisdiction; generally a case must either involve a question of federal law or it must involve parties from two different states. Furthermore, a decision by a state court, like the CA Superior Ct. is not appealable to the 9th Circuit, it is only appealable to the SCOTUS as a last resort IF it involves a federal constitutional question.

This case does not invoke federal law because it was argued and decided upon the grounds that a CA State Preemption law prohibited municipalities like SF from passing this sort of law. The only question was whether or not this law applied to SF, which BTW it clearly does. This was NOT a 2nd Amendment case.

This case could be appealed to the CA Ct. of Appeals (if there is one) and then to the the CA Supreme Court, but I don't see how it is going to make it into federal court. Generally, once your state court appeals are exhausted, the only appeal left it to the U.S. Supreme Court if you can claim that the U.S. Constitution has been violated by the lower ruling. SF certainly doesn't have a claim that the state preemption law violates the U.S. Constitution, so I don't see them even bothering.

Additionally, the SCOTUS has almost complete discretion in deciding which cases it hears, and this certainly wouldn't be one that it would accept. (It has refused to hear a 2nd Amendment case for roughly 80 years)

IIRC, at the time this ban was passed, even the SF Municipal Gov't acknowledged that it was invalid under the state preemption law. There are no close questions in this case, and I kinda doubt that they will even go through all the state appellate proceedings, unless they really want to burn some tax dollars. Then again, thats what this whole thing has been about so far, making a meaningless statement on the taxpayers bill.

All the best,


Joe
 

·
1943 - 2009
Joined
·
10,368 Posts
Fargo,

You make some very valid points. You obviously have more legal knowledge than I do, so I'll defer to your expertise. But I stand by what I said. We have not heard the last of this issue. The San Francisco Board of Supervisors are rabid anti-gun zealots. They may have been stopped this time, but they'll try again.

Like ibex said, we won a battle, but the war isn't over yet.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
552 Posts
a ray of light in kaliforniastan and its burning in the dankest darkest liberal hole of all yeeeeeeeeeehaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa:danceban:
and a big:buttkick: to finestine and her bunch of loony toons
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,481 Posts
I'm very happy some sense is prevailing there. :congrats:

Here's another version:

Judge overturns San Francisco weapons ban
DAVID KRAVETS, Associated Press

SAN FRANCISCO - A state trial judge on Monday overturned a voter-approved city ordinance that banned handgun possession and firearm sales in San Francisco, siding with gun owners who said the city did not have the authority to prohibit the weapons.

Measure H was placed on the November ballot by the San Francisco County Board of Supervisors, who were frustrated by a rising number of gun-related homicides in the city of 750,000. San Francisco recorded at least 94 murders last year, a 10-year high.

The National Rifle Association sued a day after 58 percent of voters approved the law.

In siding with the gun owners, San Francisco County Superior Court Judge James Warren said a local government cannot ban weapons because the California Legislature allows their sale and possession.

"My clients are thrilled that the court recognized that law-abiding firearms owners who choose to own a gun to defend themselves or their families are part of the solution and not part of the problem," NRA attorney Chuck Michel said. "Hopefully, the city will recognize that gun owners can contribute to the effort to fight the criminal misuse of firearms, a goal that we all share."

The ordinance targeted only city residents, meaning nonresidents in the city or even tourists were not banned from possessing or selling guns here.

Warren's decision was not unexpected. In 1982, a California appeals court nullified an almost identical San Francisco gun ban largely on grounds that the city cannot enact an ordinance that conflicts with state law.

But years later, in 1998, a state appeals court upheld West Hollywood's ban on the sale of so-called Saturday night specials, small and cheap handguns that city leaders said contributed to violent crime. And three years ago, the California Supreme Court ruled in favor of Los Angeles and Alameda counties, saying local governments could ban the possession and sale of weapons on government property, such as fairgrounds.

That decision, however, did not address the issue of private property sales and possession, as outlined in the San Francisco law.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit also is considering a challenge to a similar handgun ban in the District of Columbia that alleges the law violates a Second Amendment right of individuals to bear arms.

The NRA lawsuit here avoided those allegations.

Matt Dorsey, a spokesman for City Attorney Dennis Herrera, whose office unsuccessfully defended the law before Warren, said the city was mulling whether it was going to appeal.

"We're disappointed that the court has denied the right of voters to enact a reasonable, narrowly tailored restriction on handgun possession," Dorsey said. "San Francisco voters spoke loud and clear on the issue of gun violence."

The case is Fiscal v. San Francisco 05-505960.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
64 Posts
Captain Crunch said:
Fargo,

You make some very valid points. You obviously have more legal knowledge than I do, so I'll defer to your expertise. But I stand by what I said. We have not heard the last of this issue. The San Francisco Board of Supervisors are rabid anti-gun zealots. They may have been stopped this time, but they'll try again.

Like ibex said, we won a battle, but the war isn't over yet.
I agree completely. I am pretty sure that CA has an intermediate appellate court, so it would go normally go there next if the city appeals. I would hope that they would give it up, but like you say, they are rabid antigunners and it is the taxpayers footing the bill. After that court, it could be appealed to the CA Supreme ct. but IIRC they can choose not to hear it. From there, federal constitutional issues could be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, but they don't have a snowballs chance in hades of getting it heard there.

All the best,


Joe
 
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Top