Re: NRA sues S.F. over firearms laws
- From: grey_ghost471-newsgroups@xxxxxxxxx (Gray Ghost)
- Date: Wed, 20 May 2009 13:15:08 -0500
"Cole Firearms Inc." <colefirearms11@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
news:F4WQl.10791$im1.40@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/05/19/BAK417MPKC.DTL
NRA sues S.F. over firearms laws
Michael Cabanatuan, Chronicle Staff Writer
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
The National Rifle Association has filed suit against the city of San
Francisco, Mayor Gavin Newsom and Police Chief Heather Fong, taking aim
at city laws it contends violate the Second Amendment right to bear arms.
The NRA filed the lawsuit in federal court Friday on behalf of six
residents and the San Francisco Veteran Police Officers Association. It
challenges three provisions of the city's police code that it says
interfere with their right "to defend themselves and others ... within
their own homes."
The provisions are:
-- A requirement that handguns in San Francisco homes be kept in a
locked cabinet or disabled with a trigger lock.
-- A ban on the sale of fragmenting bullets - a particularly deadly type
of ammunition.
-- A city ordinance that prohibits the discharge of firearms within city
limits. The law has been on the books since 1938, and is seldom, if
ever, enforced, according to city officials.
Neither the association nor the attorney who filed the suit for the NRA
could be reached for comment Monday afternoon.
The suit alleges that because of the city's failure to repeal the code
sections, the plaintiffs in the case "are subjected to irreparable harm,
in that they are unable to keep their handguns within their home in a
manner ready for immediate use to protect themselves and their families
from attack by violent intruders."
It seeks to have the laws invalidated.
Matt Dorsey, a spokesman for the city attorney's office, said the NRA's
real goal is not to strike down the specific city laws but to win court
rulings that expand the reach of the Second Amendment.
"It's more about pushing the envelope of the Second Amendment and
setting new precedents and policies," he said.
Well DUH! Is that not what the antis did, chip away here and there to set
precedents? And now it comes back to bite you on the ass and you're going to
whine about it?
The trigger-lock requirement, signed into law in 2006, prevents
residents from having "operable" handguns at their disposal, according
to the suit. It argues that the U.S. Supreme Court, in the 2008 Heller
decision, struck down a similar trigger-lock requirement in Washington
as unconstitutional because it made it impractical for residents to
protect themselves.
San Francisco's trigger-lock restriction combined with a fragmenting
bullet ban that precludes them from loading their weapons with "suitable
ammunition," the suit says, "makes it impossible for city residents to
use their handguns for the core lawful purpose of self-defense,
particularly in urgent, life-threatening situations."
Dorsey, who accused the NRA of engaging in a nationwide suit-filing
spree since the Supreme Court ruling, said San Francisco expects to
prevail.
Oh please! Which is precisely the same strategy that HCI followed.
"I don't believe anything in federal law invalidates the provisions of
the San Francisco ordinances," he said.
Then he is not much of a legal brain. It would appear that numbers of these
suits have succeeded already. With the Ninth incorporating the 2nd there
isn't a chance in Hell the SF will prevail. But I hope they spend tons of
dollars to try.
--
Always remember:
Bull Connor was a Democrat!
.
- References:
- NRA sues S.F. over firearms laws
- From: Cole Firearms Inc.
- NRA sues S.F. over firearms laws
- Prev by Date: Bill Boards about obama the illegal alien to go up all over the country
- Next by Date: Re: 14 dead - note to gun lovers
- Previous by thread: NRA sues S.F. over firearms laws
- Next by thread: Bill Boards about obama the illegal alien to go up all over the country
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
