Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
California can proceed with enforcing a law requiring people to undergo background checks to buy ammunition, after a divided federal appeals court on Monday put on hold a judge's ruling declaring ...
(Reuters) -California cannot enforce a law requiring people to undergo background checks to buy ammunition, because it violates the constitutional right to bear arms, a federal judge has ruled. In ...
A California law requiring people to submit to a background check each time they want to purchase ammunition is unconstitutional, a federal judge ruled.
Becerra, Benitez issued a preliminary injunction blocking enforcement of California's 2016 Proposition 63 law requiring background checks for ammunition sales, ruling in favor of the California Rifle & Pistol Association; he deemed the law "constitutionally defective." [16] [17] The Ninth Circuit stayed Benitez's ruling pending appeal. [17]
It requires a background check and California Department of Justice authorization to purchase ammunition, prohibits possession of high-capacity ammunition magazines over ten rounds, levies fines for failing to report when guns are stolen or lost, establishes procedures for enforcing laws prohibiting firearm possession by specified persons, and ...
San Diego, ruled that California's may-issue concealed carry rules as implemented by the County of San Diego, in combination with its ban on open carry in most areas of the state, violate the Second Amendment, because they together deny law-abiding citizens the right to bear arms in public for the lawful purpose of self-defense. [95]
Gun owners, the judge wrote, undergo more than 1 million background checks a year just to buy ammunition, and they are barred from buying ammunition from out of state, such as in Arizona or Nevada ...
He was joined by the San Diego County Gun Owners Political Action Committee, California Gun Rights Foundation, Second Amendment Foundation, and Firearms Policy Coalition, along with three other San Diego County residents who said they legally own rifles or pistols but are unable to use high-capacity magazines in them due to the law. [4] [7] [17]