Gun Ban in San Francisco Is Voided




 
--
Gun Ban in San Francisco Is Voided
 
June 14th, 2006  
moving0target
 
 

Topic: Gun Ban in San Francisco Is Voided


Gun Ban in San Francisco Is Voided
Quote:
State judge rules that a voter-approved measure barring firearm sales and purchases is illegal.
By John M. Glionna, Times Staff Writer
June 13, 2006

SAN FRANCISCO A countywide ban on handguns that would have been among the nation's toughest was overturned Monday by a state judge.

In his decision, San Francisco County Superior Court Judge James Warren struck down a measure that passed with 58% of the vote in November.

Warren sided with gun advocates such as the National Rifle Assn., which sued to overturn the law within hours of its passage.

The NRA argued that officials could not ban weapons because California law allowed for their sale and possession.

The handgun measure made it illegal to buy, sell, distribute and manufacture firearms in San Francisco.

The legislation was placed on the ballot by the San Francisco County Board of Supervisors in response to a soaring homicide rate over the last two years.

City officials were deflated by the decision.

"We're disappointed that the court denied what we viewed as a reasonable and narrowly tailored law," said Matt Dorsey, a spokesman for the San Francisco city attorney's office.

He said the office would decide whether to appeal Warren's ruling in the next few days.

An NRA spokesman hailed Monday's development.

"We think it was the right move," said spokesman Andrew Arulanandam.

"It's a sound decision that's on the side of law-abiding citizens in the city of San Francisco."

More than 250 million Americans own guns. Arulanandam did not know how many of them were in liberal San Francisco, a consolidated city-county that has a population of 750,000.

At the time of the law's passage, proponents hoped surrounding counties would follow suit. A similar ban exists in Washington, D.C., and a milder one in Chicago.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit is considering a challenge to Washington's ban.

Gun advocates say the law violates a 2nd Amendment right of individuals to bear arms.

San Francisco's ban also was opposed by the San Francisco Police Officers Assn., which said the new law nullified "the personal choice of city residents to lawfully possess a handgun for self-defense purposes."
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedi...-pe-california


How about that. A judge who sides against mob rule and human rights violations...and cops agree with the guy! Narrowly tailored my behind.
June 14th, 2006  
Ted
 
 
That is just too bad. I would like to have seen it pass. Then again, just passing the law in a county will make people buy their gun outside that county, won't it? I like the initiative, but it lacks the means to get the proper desired affects...
June 14th, 2006  
moving0target
 
 
It certainly does lack means. Mean like legality. This is what happens when democracy rears its ugly head.
--
Gun Ban in San Francisco Is Voided
June 14th, 2006  
Rabs
 
 
Meh this is bullcrap, I beleive in rule by hte people. If they have a vote and want to ban the sale of hand-guns so be it. Its what the people want.
June 14th, 2006  
behemoth79
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rabs
Meh this is bullcrap, I beleive in rule by hte people. If they have a vote and want to ban the sale of hand-guns so be it. Its what the people want.
you cant really let the people do what they want. i recall learning of a time when the majority of people in america thought black people should be property. should we have let the majority rule then too? one thing ive learned, and its helped me get over being pissed off so much at politics, is the constitution was meant to protect the minority, not to satisfy the majority.
June 15th, 2006  
Rabs
 
 
Quote:
you cant really let the people do what they want. i recall learning of a time when the majority of people in america thought black people should be property. should we have let the majority rule then too? one thing ive learned, and its helped me get over being pissed off so much at politics, is the constitution was meant to protect the minority, not to satisfy the majority.
That all sounds good until you get a few nutcase judges.
June 15th, 2006  
5.56X45mm
 
 
Thank God that the NRA and Gun Owners of America was bale to do something.

I know some folks out there that were pissed that it would've been against the law for them to keep their pistols.
June 15th, 2006  
Mohmar Deathstrike
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rabs
Meh this is bullcrap, I beleive in rule by hte people. If they have a vote and want to ban the sale of hand-guns so be it. Its what the people want.
Hopefully they'll see the error of their ways when only *******s have guns.
June 15th, 2006  
gladius
 
The *******s already have guns.

The law isn't going to stop criminals from getting guns. They'll get it law or no law.

The only one this law stops from getting guns are the law abidding citizens.
June 16th, 2006  
Rob Henderson
 
 
Exactly. Gun control laws dont hinder the criminals. They'll get them no matter what.This will only hurt people who want to follow the law that has betrayed them.
 


Similar Topics
Top 10 Gun Safety Rules
40 Reasons to Support Gun Control
"Tommy's Dictionary Of The Trenches" WWI
Subject: GUN CONTROL