For decades, Americans have watched California issue some of the most progressive laws in the country. In recent years, many residents have fled the state–as many of its policies have resulted in rising costs of living, rampant homelessness, and unchecked crime.
Many critics have commented on California legislation which, they claim, restricts the rights of American citizens. Some of these laws have been in place for three decades or more.
But thanks to a major court ruling from last year, Americans have stepped up to challenge some of California’s restrictions. And a federal court just ruled the law unconstitutional.
A federal judge overturned California’s ban on so-called assault weapons on Thursday, saying the three-decade-old prohibition against semi-automatic firearms violates the constitutional right to bear arms.
U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez of San Diego found that a handful of criminals cannot dictate the rules for millions of law-abiding American households who carry firearms like AR-15 rifles for self-defense.
A federal court ruled against a California law that was passed in 1989 banning “assault weapons.” That term is commonly used by gun control advocates to incorrectly describe semi-automatic rifles and other firearms.
California was the first state to ban such firearms in the 80s. A Democrat-led Congress passed a similar ban nationwide in the 90s, which was overturned later. Many blue states have similar gun control restrictions, while red states enjoy much looser gun laws.
Many critics of gun control have pointed out that states with the strongest gun control laws often have the worst gun crime statistics. Second Amendment advocates suggest this is because law-abiding citizens are unable to protect themselves, while criminals have easy access to firearms.
But the tide has been turning ever since the Supreme Court ruled against strike gun control laws from New York. Numerous groups have challenged other states, in attempts to change gun control restrictions.
After the court’s ruling against California, the state quickly began an appeal. It is unknown how successful they might be in reversing this ruling.
Author: Kit Fargo
These content links are provided by Content.ad. Both Content.ad and the web site upon which the links are displayed may receive compensation when readers click on these links. Some of the content you are redirected to may be sponsored content. View our privacy policy here.
To learn how you can use Content.ad to drive visitors to your content or add this service to your site, please contact us at [email protected].
Family-Friendly Content
Website owners select the type of content that appears in our units. However, if you would like to ensure that Content.ad always displays family-friendly content on this device, regardless of what site you are on, check the option below. Learn More
These content links are provided by Content.ad. Both Content.ad and the web site upon which the links are displayed may receive compensation when readers click on these links. Some of the content you are redirected to may be sponsored content. View our privacy policy here.
To learn how you can use Content.ad to drive visitors to your content or add this service to your site, please contact us at [email protected].
Family-Friendly Content
Website owners select the type of content that appears in our units. However, if you would like to ensure that Content.ad always displays family-friendly content on this device, regardless of what site you are on, check the option below. Learn More
