Tracy Rifle & Pistol LLC v. Kamala Harris. This was a suit challenging California's law prohibiting gun stores from having images of pistols visible from the outside. In this case, our side requested summary judgment (which means, the case is so clearly on one side that there is no need to go to trial). The judge granted it. California's claim was that images of handguns will cause impulsive sorts to buy a gun for suicide or crime.
The underlying free speech issue is whether the speech is misleading and lawful. The judge ruled that purchasing a handgun is constitutionally protected and a sign showing a handgun is not misleading. (I suppose if it showed a Star Trek phaser...) The only issue is whether a legitimate and substantial governmental interest is advanced by such a ban.
The government's own expert admitted that the mean time between handgun purchase and suicide is 11 years. This does not sound impulsive to me and it did not to the judge.
With respect to gun crimes: the judge said the state had failed to provide any evidence that stopping impulsive handgun purchases was anymore effective than the ten day waiting period, which would seem to block impulse purchases.
Of course, the state will next appeal to the 9th Circus where the results are obvious. This is why, as much as many people dislike Trump, he is the best chance of restoring the rule of law. Federal judges do not live forever and their replacements could not be any worse than most of the current occupants of the 9th Circus.
Want to help fund suits like this? Make a contribution to CalGuns foundation (a 501(c)(3))
And while this goes on, the Del Mar Fairgrounds (where the Del Mar race course is, among other things), here in San Diego, has voted to not renew its contract with Crossroads of the West after Dec for gun shows. I wonder how they'll get around the "bake the cake, citizen" problem.
ReplyDeleteAndy: guns and gun shows are not a sexual minority.
ReplyDelete