Federal Judge Tries To Make It Easier To Obtain A Murder Weapon In California

[SecularMotion]

Since 1923, California has had a law requiring people who wish to buy firearms to wait a certain period of time before they could acquire the gun, although the length of this waiting period has varied over the years. Last Friday, however, a federal judge held that many gun buyers have a constitutional right not to be subject to the ten day waiting period currently required by state law. According to Judge Anthony Ishii, a Clinton appointee, this waiting period cannot be applied “to those persons who already lawfully possess a firearm as confirmed by” a state database. Nor can it be applied to people with licences to carry a concealed weapon.

A core prong of Judge Ishii’s logic is that, whatever danger arises when someone newly obtains a gun, that danger already exists if they already possess a firearm. The strongest argument for California’s waiting period is that it provides a “cooling off period” that discourages “impulsive acts of violence to others or to themselves.” Yet Ishii concludes that this argument does not apply to current gun owners, because “If a person already possess a firearm, then that person will generally have access to that firearm and may commit impulsive acts of violence with it.”

In reaching this conclusion, Ishii dismisses the argument that a potential shooter becomes more dangerous if they obtain additional weapons or new kinds of weapons. At one point, he even dismisses a law enforcement officer’s testimony about an mass shooter who possessed “at least one pistol, a rifle, and an assault-style weapon, and who killed nine people in Cupertino, California,” in part by noting that this shooter “did not use the most dangerous firearm (the assault weapon).”

In reality, however, the question of which kind of firearm is the “most dangerous” depends on circumstance. Though an assault rifle may be particularly deadly during a mass shooting incident, especially if it is equipped with a high-capacity magazine, the deadliest guns in the United States are not assault rifles. They are handguns. According to FBI data, approximately 47,500 murders were committed with a firearm in 2001-2005. Almost 8 in 10 of these murders involved a handgun.

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2014/08/26/3475556/a-federal-judge-wants-to-make-it-easier-to-obtain-a-murder-weapon-in-california/

[Duckhunter935]

1. and that would be a

wrong interpretation. Sorry your side lost another court decision.

The judge is right in the logic and made a correct finding.

A core prong of Judge Ishii’s logic is that, whatever danger arises when someone newly obtains a gun, that danger already exists if they already possess a firearm. The strongest argument for California’s waiting period is that it provides a “cooling off period” that discourages “impulsive acts of violence to others or to themselves.” Yet Ishii concludes that this argument does not apply to current gun owners, because “If a person already possess a firearm, then that person will generally have access to that firearm and may commit impulsive acts of violence with it.”

Would you be so nice to comment on or discuss with me your latest cut and paste post?

[virginia mountainman]

3. "lost another"..

LOL!!!!

[beevul]

8. Please, I can't take the...

Please, I can't take the backlash anymore. Uncle. UNCLE!!

[blueridge3210]

2. Google Dump.

Comments?

[Duckhunter935]

4. too bad the group he hosts is not his favorite

Favorite group: Gun Control & RKBA, 148 posts in the last 90 days (38% of total posts)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=200251

[blueridge3210]

5. *snort* (nt)

[krispos42]

6. And this is why I love you posting this stuff here

It makes your viewpoints look like the clumsy and blatantly obvious tactics of Rove/Luntz message management.


But, it shows how you really feel. All guns are murder weapons, and ipso facto should be removed from society as much as possible, using any means necessary.

Fresno federal judge: State's 10-day wait to buy firearms unconstitutional for some

By John Ellis, The Fresno Bee

August 25, 2014


A federal judge in Fresno on Monday ruled the state's 10-day waiting period for buying firearms is unconstitutional for those who've previously purchased weapons and cleared background checks.

U.S. District Court Judge Anthony W. Ishii issued the ruling after a March bench trial, as well as deposition testimony and numerous briefings that concluded at the end of June. Last December, he had denied a request by state Attorney General Kamala Harris to throw out the lawsuit. Harris, along with the California Department of Justice, were defendants in the suit.

<snip>

Ishii's 56-page ruling specifically states that "it is expressing no opinion on the constitutionality of the 10-day waiting period in general or as applied to first-time California firearms purchasers."

The suit contended that the state's 10-day waiting period violates the U.S. Constitution's 2nd and 14th amendments by requiring firearms buyers "who lawfully already have at least one firearm registered in their name" to continually go through the waiting period.

<more>

http://www.fresnobee.com/2014/08/25/4087156/fresno-federal-judge-rules-states.html?sp=/99/406/

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1172152360


Oh, look, a legitimate news source.

[Duckhunter935]

7. and here is another news source

In another setback for California's tough gun-control laws, a federal judge ruled Monday that the state can't require gun buyers to wait 10 days to pick up their newly purchased weapon if they already own a gun or have a license to possess a handgun.

U.S. District Judge Anthony Ishii of Fresno said the 10-day wait for current gun owners is a restriction on constitutional rights that isn't justified by safety concerns. He noted that all firearms purchasers, including second- and third-time buyers, must pass a state background check of their criminal and mental-health records, but said it was unreasonable to make gun owners wait the full 10 days to acquire another weapon.

He said there was evidence that some would-be gun buyers, including the two individual plaintiffs in the case, had decided not to make the purchase because of the time and expense needed for a second trip to a gun shop.

"The 10-day waiting period burdens the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms," Ishii said.

http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Judge-strikes-down-California-s-10-day-wait-5711761.php

Never comments on the cut and paste posts but does keep his favorite group alive.

[SecularMotion]

9. Did you miss this?

Two caveats should be noted with respect to Ishii’s decision. The first is that he stays his order for 180 days, thus giving the state plenty of time to appeal the decision before it takes effect. There also is no guarantee that Ishii’s decision will be upheld by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which has an overwhelmingly Democratic membership.

[IronGate]

10. OML, he speaks.

[IronGate]

11. You're hanging your hat that this decision will be overturned

because the 9th is overwhelmingly staffed with Democrats?
If I were you, I wouldn't bet the farm on that happening.

[krispos42]

12. Stay on topic, please. n/t

[gejohnston]

13. when you say that

you are buying into the Republican meme that judges appointed by Democrats are "activists" that base their rulings on ideology instead of facts and the law.

There also is no guarantee that Ishii’s decision will be upheld by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which has an overwhelmingly Democratic membership.

[DonP]

14. Would those be the same "Dem" Judges that made the Peruta decision too?

That's right up there with the grabbers that are absolutely sure that Heller and McDonald will be overturned as soon as the President appoints one more judge to SCOTUS.

[ileus]

15. Regressives love their victim control.