Sacramento, California (AP)-the voter, which is required by checks on people buying bullets, is unconstitutional, the Federal Court of Appeal ruled on Thursday with a struggle in the state’s efforts to combat weapons.
When maintaining 2024. queriesThe Ninth Court of Appeal of the United States found that the law violated the second amendment. Voters accepted the law In 2016 and came into force in 2019.
Many states, including California, make people pass a background check before they can buy a gun. California has gone a step forward, requiring a background check that is worth either $ 1 or $ 19, depending on the eligibility, every time someone buys bullets.
Last year, US district judge Roger Benitez decided that the law was non -constitutional, since if people could not buy bullets, they could not use their weapons for self -defense.
The ninth chain agreed. Writing about two of the three judges in the Court of Appeal, Judge Sandra Seguta said that the law “meaningfully restricted” constitutional right to hold weapons, forcing weapons owners to be checked before every bullet purchase.
“The right to protect and bear weapons includes the right to manage them, which requires ammunition,” the judge wrote.
Democratic governor Gavin Newo, who supported the background checks, determined the court’s decision.
“Strong weapon laws are saving life – and today’s solution is a slap in the face of the progress that California has achieved in recent years to protect its communities more favorable than weapons violence,” Newsom said. “The Californians voted in order to require ammunition checks and their votes must matter.”
The California Department of Justice said the state needs laws for “common sense, rescue” that do not allow ammunition to fall into the wrong hands.
“We are deeply disappointed with today’s decision – a critical and life -saving measure that closes a dangerous door,” the department statement said. “Our families, schools and neighborhoods deserve nothing less than the most basic protection against preventable arms violence, and we look at our legal capabilities.”
Chuck Michel, president and general advisor to the California Association for Rifles and Pistols, called the law “absurdly limiting”.
“This case is a long difficult fight against overcoming the control of government weapons, but firearms cannot be effective without ammunition to make it operated. The California state continues to try to undress its rights and we continue to prove that their actions are unconstitutional,” Michel said.
The law remains in force until the state appealed the decision of the lower court. Benitez criticized the automated state check system that said it rejected about 11% of candidates or 58,087 requests in the first half of 2023.
California’s law aimed to help police find people who have weapons illegally, such as convicted criminals, people with certain mental illnesses and people with some sentences for domestic violence. Sometimes they order kits online and assemble weapons in their home. Weapons do not have serial numbers and are difficult to track the law enforcement agencies, but the people who own them appear in background checks when trying to buy bullets.
John Parkin, President of Coyote Point Armory in Burlingm, California, said the law made it difficult or impossible for some owners of legal weapons to buy ammunition. For example, the people of outside the state and the residents of California with old weapons could not buy bullets because they were not in the database of approved weapons, he said.
“It is written to be angry with the owners of weapons in California. There was not much logic for him,” said Parkin for the law. “I think there are better ways to keep the public.”
California has some of the most difficult weapons laws in the country. Many of them are challenged in court in the light of the US Supreme Court’s decision, which set a new standard for interpreting weapons laws. The decision is said that weapons laws must be in accordance with the historical tradition of the nation to regulate firearms.
Two other laws of weapons in California have been struck in recent years, one who banned the disassembled magazines that may contain more than 10 bullets and another who banned the sale of weapons in the style of attack. These decisions have been appealed. Other laws that are challenged include rules requiring weapons stores to have digital monitoring systems and restrictions on the sale of new pistols.