« TV program on FLA law | Main | Brady Campaign on San Fran gun ban »
San Fran gun ban passes
Word is that the SF referendum on a city gun ban passed yesterday. It reportedly outlaws and authorizes confiscation of all handguns, and prohibits future transfers of rifles and shotguns. From what I've heard, it's in violation of the State pre-emption laws. NRA has announced it'll sue (see extended entry below).
Hint to anyone proposing a pre-emption statute, or want to put teeth in it: insert a provision for attorneys' fees and perhaps damages. Otherwise, a city can and will go ahead and enact one anyway, and figure if anyone objects to the illegality they've have to lay out thousands in legal fees to do anything about it.
[UPDATE: Just received an email from Don Kates, stating that he and Chuck Michel have filed suit challenging it as a violation of the state pre-emption laws.]
NRA to File Lawsuit Challenging
San Francisco Gun Ban
Fairfax, VA - Even with opposition from San Francisco law enforcement and major media outlets, Proposition H -- a measure banning the lawful possession, sale and manufacture of handguns and ammunition within city limits -- passed yesterday. The National Rifle Association (NRA) will file a lawsuit challenging this severe gun ban.
NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre stated, "We are disappointed, but this fight is just beginning. Lawful residents of San Francisco are being stripped of their freedom because of an illegal measure that defies common sense. We will fight this outrageous assault on the rights of law-abiding San Franciscans and I believe that we will prevail."
Many San Francisco residents who initially supported the ban changed their opinion after NRA and local volunteers began voter education efforts throughout the city. The campaign received an additional boost when the San Francisco Police Officers Association condemned the gun ban, declaring it would "nullify the personal choice of city residents to lawfully possess a handgun for self-defense purposes." Major San Francisco newspapers also voiced opposition to Proposition H.
In response to the passage of this proposition, NRA will lead a coalition of organizations to immediately file a lawsuit against this illegal ban in San Francisco. Proposition H, in addition to violating federal guarantees, also violates various California state laws and is therefore preempted.
Chris W. Cox, NRA's chief lobbyist, concluded, "This is a hollow victory for the gun control lobby because this scheme is in clear violation of California law. We will file suit and fight this to the highest courts in the country until good sense prevails once again in San Francisco."
Comments
The vote confirms everything we have long known about San Fransisco...
C.A.G.
Posted by: Christopher A. George at November 9, 2005 01:28 PM
Is this just a ban on handguns or does it include rifles and shotguns too?
Posted by: DP at November 9, 2005 01:46 PM
I wish I had more confidence that the preemption argument was a winner. I think it depends on there being a clearly stated right under California law to possess a firearm, which I don't think exists. Penal Code Section 12026 is not exactly a strong recognition of such a right. Maybe there's another provision I don't know about.
I'm not sure that this is any better, but it seems to me that the SF gun ban might be described as an interference, under color of law, by intimidation or coercion, with the exercise of a right secured by the laws of California; to wit, the right to use "any necessary force" to protect the person or property of oneself or one's family from wrongful injury. See California Civil Code Sections 50 and 52.1.
Posted by: Troopship Berlin at November 9, 2005 04:38 PM
If the support from the police shows anything, we have a long way to go in winning the philosophical and rhetorical battle for gun rights. The 2A says nothing about self-defense (in the way the SFPOA means it, at least).
Posted by: Mike at November 10, 2005 10:42 AM
So does this mean if Roe is reversed by "Bush's conservative court" and the issue reverts to the states, the state pre-emption for abortion in CA should be challenged by the many cities and counties?
It would be interesting to propose this if a challenge to state pre-emption on gun laws from SF's Prop H were going to set precedent.
Posted by: Jim D. at November 10, 2005 12:19 PM
Its been said that liberalism is a mental illness. They certainly oppose freedom of choice whether to arm oneself against a perceived threat. They have always had the freedom to not do so. Now San Francisco is more dangerous. I suggest we don't spend money there accordingly.
Posted by: The Mechanic at November 10, 2005 06:27 PM
Another reason I'm glad I live in Michigan. San Francisco is truly like a bowl of granola.
Posted by: David M. Nord at January 6, 2006 11:12 AM
(HITLER IS BACK)
Posted by: bill jones at February 22, 2006 08:21 PM
This is rediculous, What is happening to our country. Where are all of our rights going? this is a truely scary thought considering they just violated the second amendment, what is next? no more voting... like Bill jones said, "hitler is back".
Posted by: Eric Ammons at March 29, 2006 02:42 PM