{"id":720,"date":"2017-04-29T03:09:00","date_gmt":"2017-04-29T03:09:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/onlygunsandmoney.com\/2017\/04\/29\/saf-calguns-firearms-policy-coalition\/"},"modified":"2019-08-16T18:27:43","modified_gmt":"2019-08-16T18:27:43","slug":"saf-calguns-firearms-policy-coalition","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/onlygunsandmoney.com\/?p=720","title":{"rendered":"SAF, CalGuns, Firearms Policy Coalition, And Others Sue California Over Mag Ban"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class='__iawmlf-post-loop-links' style='display:none;' data-iawmlf-post-links='[{&quot;id&quot;:8554,&quot;href&quot;:&quot;https:\\\/\\\/www.calgunsfoundation.org\\\/federal_lawsuit_filed_to_challenge_california_s_ban_on_large_capacity_firearm_magazines&quot;,&quot;archived_href&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;redirect_href&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;checks&quot;:[],&quot;broken&quot;:false,&quot;last_checked&quot;:null,&quot;process&quot;:&quot;done&quot;},{&quot;id&quot;:8555,&quot;href&quot;:&quot;https:\\\/\\\/www.calgunsfoundation.org\\\/wiese_v_becerra&quot;,&quot;archived_href&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;redirect_href&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;checks&quot;:[],&quot;broken&quot;:false,&quot;last_checked&quot;:null,&quot;process&quot;:&quot;done&quot;}]'><\/div>\n<p>\nNews of this was released this afternoon while I was in the Annual National Firearms Law Seminar and didn&#8217;t have my computer handy. A coalition of groups including the Second Amendment Foundation, the CalGuns Foundation, the Firearms Policy Coalition, and the Firearms Policy Foundation plus seven individuals filed suit challenging the state&#8217;s ban on standard capacity magazines. The suit was filed in the US District Court for the Eastern District of California.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.calgunsfoundation.org\/federal_lawsuit_filed_to_challenge_california_s_ban_on_large_capacity_firearm_magazines\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">From the news release sent out by the CalGuns Foundation<\/a>:<\/p>\n<blockquote class=\"tr_bq\">\n<div style=\"background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #333333; font-family: Helvetica-Regular; font-size: 16px; margin-bottom: 1.625em; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;\">\n<i>FRESNO, CA (April 28, 2017) \u2014 Today, attorneys for 7 individual gun owners and 4 civil rights advocacy organizations have filed a federal lawsuit challenging the State of California\u2019s ban on so-called \u201clarge-capacity\u201d firearm magazines that hold more than 10 rounds \u201con their own behalves, and as representatives on behalf of the class of individuals who are or would be affected by the Large-Capacity Magazine Ban.\u201d<\/i><\/div>\n<div style=\"background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #333333; font-family: Helvetica-Regular; font-size: 16px; margin-bottom: 1.625em; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;\">\n<i>The civil rights case, captioned as&nbsp;<\/i><span style=\"border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; font-family: inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;\">William Wiese, et al. v. California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, et al.<\/span><i>, was filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, Fresno Division, and is supported by civil rights groups The Calguns Foundation (CGF), Second Amendment Foundation (SAF), Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC), and Firearms Policy Foundation (FPF)<\/i><\/div>\n<div style=\"background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #333333; font-family: Helvetica-Regular; font-size: 16px; margin-bottom: 1.625em; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;\">\n<i>A copy of the lawsuit\u2019s complaint and its exhibits can be viewed or downloaded&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.calgunsfoundation.org\/wiese_v_becerra\" style=\"border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #223744; font-family: inherit; font-weight: inherit; margin: 0px; outline: none; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">here<\/a>.<\/i><\/div>\n<div style=\"background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #333333; font-family: Helvetica-Regular; font-size: 16px; margin-bottom: 1.625em; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;\">\n<i>Last year, California Governor Jerry Brown signed into law Senate Bill 1446 (SB 1446), which changed state statutes to completely ban law-abiding people from possessing all \u201clarge-capacity\u201d firearm magazines as of July 1, 2017. Following that, Lt. Governor Gavin Newsom\u2019s Proposition 63 (Prop 63) \u201cSafety For All Act\u201d gun control initiative\u2014which also contained language banning \u201clarge-capacity\u201d magazines\u2014was passed by voters in the November general election.<\/i><\/div>\n<div style=\"background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #333333; font-family: Helvetica-Regular; font-size: 16px; margin-bottom: 1.625em; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;\">\n<i>Prior to Proposition 63 and SB 1446, thousands of law-abiding Californians could possess legally-owned (\u201cgrandfathered\u201d) large-capacity magazines, but now must remove them from their possession or ownership in the State by July 1 at their own expense or face criminal liability and fines.<\/i><\/div>\n<div style=\"background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #333333; font-family: Helvetica-Regular; font-size: 16px; margin-bottom: 1.625em; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;\">\n<i>The plaintiffs believe that the State\u2019s ban violates their constitutional rights, including their fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms protected under the Second Amendment, because magazines are \u201can intrinsic part of all semi-automatic firearms\u201d and \u201care not merely individual pieces of personal property, but rather, are intrinsic and inherent constitutionally-protected parts of constitutionally-protected firearms.\u201d<\/i><\/div>\n<div style=\"background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #333333; font-family: Helvetica-Regular; font-size: 16px; margin-bottom: 1.625em; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;\">\n<i>In a \u201cFinding of Emergency\u201d for related firearm magazine regulations it had sought to issue in December (attached to the complaint as Exhibit A), the California Department of Justice admitted that \u201c[t]here are likely hundreds of thousands of large-capacity magazines in California at this time\u201d and that the \u201cDepartment therefore expects many gun owners to be affected by the new ban.\u201d<\/i><\/div>\n<div style=\"background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #333333; font-family: Helvetica-Regular; font-size: 16px; margin-bottom: 1.625em; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;\">\n<i>In addition to its Second Amendment claims, the lawsuit \u201cfurther challenges the Large-Capacity Magazine Ban statutory scheme which would\u2026. subject thousands of law-abiding gun owners to criminal liability and sanctions, and subjecting their lawfully-possessed personal property to forfeiture, seizure and permanent confiscation, without due process or compensation.\u201d<\/i><\/div>\n<div style=\"background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #333333; font-family: Helvetica-Regular; font-size: 16px; margin-bottom: 1.625em; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;\">\n<i>The case also includes vagueness challenges, one of which centers on the confusion surrounding the State\u2019s two active\u2014but very different\u2014chaptered versions of Penal Code \u00a7 32406. A number of exemptions to the ban are found in the active Section 32406 that was enacted under SB 1446, but the active version of Section 32406 enacted by California voters under Prop 63 contains far fewer exemptions.<\/i><\/div>\n<div style=\"background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #333333; font-family: Helvetica-Regular; font-size: 16px; margin-bottom: 1.625em; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;\">\n<i>\u201cCalifornia\u2019s magazine ban laws violate the constitutional rights of law-abiding people in many ways,\u201d said attorney George M. Lee, a partner of the plaintiffs\u2019 San Francisco law firm Seiler Epstein Ziegler &amp; Applegate LLP. \u201cNot only does the ban infringe on Second Amendment rights, but it is clearly now a taking of private property. In fact, as we contend in the complaint, it amounts to a de facto confiscation.\u201d<\/i><\/div>\n<div style=\"background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #333333; font-family: Helvetica-Regular; font-size: 16px; margin-bottom: 1.625em; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;\">\n<i>Lee also takes issue with the way the new magazine ban affects people who have lawfully possessed \u201cgrandfathered\u201d magazines since before the original ban on importation in 2000. \u201cAs a part of the legislative compromise associated with that original ban, owners of those grandfathered magazines were specifically exempt from the law,\u201d he said. \u201cThe Legislature is basically reneging on that deal made many years ago.\u201d<\/i><\/div>\n<div style=\"background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #333333; font-family: Helvetica-Regular; font-size: 16px; margin-bottom: 1.625em; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;\">\n<i>\u201cThe State of California\u2019s ban scheme stands for the proposition that most any personal property can simply be taken away from you or forced out of your possession without due process or just compensation by legislative fiat,\u201d commented CGF Chairman Gene Hoffman. \u201cToday it\u2019s firearm magazines, but tomorrow it will most certainly be some other constitutionally-protected private property.\u201d<\/i><\/div>\n<div style=\"background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #333333; font-family: Helvetica-Regular; font-size: 16px; margin-bottom: 1.625em; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;\">\n<i>\u201cEnforcement of this ban,\u201d explained SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb, \u201cwould immediately place thousands of law-abiding California gun owners in jeopardy of criminal liability and subjects their personal property to forfeiture, seizure and permanent confiscation, which is government taking, without due process or compensation. We cannot allow that to go unchallenged.\u201d<\/i><\/div>\n<div style=\"background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #333333; font-family: Helvetica-Regular; font-size: 16px; margin-bottom: 1.625em; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;\">\n<i>\u201cCalifornia\u2019s magazine laws will turn many thousands of good, law-abiding people into criminals,\u201d said Brandon Combs, president of FPC and chairman of FPF, \u201cbut do nothing to advance public safety.<\/i><\/div>\n<div style=\"background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #333333; font-family: Helvetica-Regular; font-size: 16px; margin-bottom: 1.625em; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;\">\n<i>\u201cWhile California\u2019s political leadership might prefer some kind of police state without any Second Amendment or property rights, we believe that the Constitution takes their policy preferences off the table. This lawsuit is one of many that we hope will help restore fundamental freedoms in the Golden State and across the nation.\u201d<\/i><\/div>\n<div style=\"background-color: white; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #333333; font-family: Helvetica-Regular; font-size: 16px; margin-bottom: 1.625em; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;\">\n<i>Douglas A. Applegate, also of Seiler Epstein Ziegler &amp; Applegate LLP, joins Lee on the case as co-counsel.<\/i><\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p>This plus the NRA lawsuit is a good start. <\/p>\n<div style=\"margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px;\" class=\"sharethis-inline-share-buttons\" ><\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>News of this was released this afternoon while I was in the Annual National Firearms Law Seminar and didn&#8217;t&hellip;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"iawp_total_views":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[1569,515,37,937,384,1570],"class_list":["post-720","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized","tag-bill-wiese","tag-calguns-foundation","tag-firearms-policy-coalition","tag-magazine-bans","tag-second-amendment-foundation","tag-wiese-et-al-v-bacerra-et-al"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/onlygunsandmoney.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/720","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/onlygunsandmoney.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/onlygunsandmoney.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/onlygunsandmoney.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/onlygunsandmoney.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=720"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/onlygunsandmoney.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/720\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":11055,"href":"https:\/\/onlygunsandmoney.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/720\/revisions\/11055"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/onlygunsandmoney.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=720"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/onlygunsandmoney.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=720"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/onlygunsandmoney.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=720"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}