FPC: New Filings and Order in Lawsuit Challenging California’s “Assault Weapon” Ban
Forum Information
You will earn 1.5 pts. per new post (reply) in this forum.
**Registered members may reply to any topic in this forum**
You will earn 1.5 pts. per new post (reply) in this forum.
**Registered members may reply to any topic in this forum**
-
- Posts: 17274
- Joined: Mon Oct 30, 2017 5:16 pm
- Contact:
- Status: Offline
FPC: New Filings and Order in Lawsuit Challenging California’s “Assault Weapon” Ban iStock 884191010U.S.A. –-(AmmoLand.com)- Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) submitted two new filings to the Court in Miller v. Becerra, its federal Second Amendment challenge to the State of California’s ban on so-called “assault weapons.” The filings can be viewed at FPCLegal.org. Last week, FPC announced the filing of its proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law, which detailed the legal and factual holdings we wish the Court to adopt in its judgment. FPC filed its response to the State’s proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law this week, where we continue to contend that:
- The arms banned by California as “assault weapons” are constitutionally protected
- The arms banned by California as “assault weapons” are commonly possessed and used for lawful purposes including self-defense in the majority of the United States
- The arms banned by California as “assault weapons” are not more lethal than arms that are not banned
- Lack of relevance;
- Lack of foundation; and
- Confusion of the issues.
- The total number of firearms sold in the state with background checks
- If ascertainable, the total number of rifles, the total number of shotguns, the total number of semiautomatic pistols, and the total number of revolvers sold in the state, with background checks; and,
- If ascertainable, the number of first-time buyers of a firearm in the state.
- Declaratory relief adjudging that the definitions of “assault weapon” pursuant to Penal Code §§ 30515(a) and (b), and Title 11, California Code of Regulations §§ 5460 and 5471, are unconstitutional on their face and as applied, and violate the Second Amendment, to the extent that the State’s laws and regulations operate to prohibit or prevent Plaintiffs and similarly situated persons from exercising their rights, including acquiring, keeping, bearing, transporting, transferring, and using “assault weapons” for lawful purposes;
- Declaratory relief adjudging that California Penal Code §§ 30600, 30605, 30800, 30910, 30915, 30945, 30950, 31000, and 31005 are unconstitutional on their face and as applied, and in violation of the Second Amendment, to the extent that the State’s laws and regulations operate to prohibit or prevent Plaintiffs and similarly situated persons from exercising their rights, including acquiring, keeping, bearing, transporting, transferring, and using “assault weapons” for lawful purposes;
- Declaratory relief supporting an injunction, and an order temporarily and permanently enjoining Defendants, their officers, agents, servants, employees, and all persons in active concert or participation with them, who receive actual notice of the injunction, from enforcement or application of Penal Code §§ 30515(a) and (b), 30600, 30605, 30800, 30910, 30915, 30945, 30950, 31000, and 31005, as well as Title 11, California Code of Regulations §§ 5460 and 5471, against Plaintiffs on an as-applied basis, and against all similarly situated persons;
- Costs of suit, including attorneys’ fees and costs under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 and any other applicable law; and,
- Any and all further relief to which Plaintiffs may be justly entitled.