26 states voice opposition to San Francisco home gun storage

As the name indicates, this is the place for gun-related political discussions. It is not open to other political topics.

Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton

Post Reply
katmandu
Member
Posts: 121
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 7:08 pm

26 states voice opposition to San Francisco home gun storage

Post by katmandu »

Interesting item in the local paper this morning, found it online too:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/gov ... n-storage/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I couldn't figure out what grounds other states would have to sue, but this explains it:

"Wisconsin Attorney General Brad Schimel (R) said in a statement the ordinance could set a precedent that “could influence policy decisions and court holdings” nationwide, which is why so many states signed on."
User avatar
joe817
Senior Member
Posts: 9317
Joined: Fri May 22, 2009 7:13 pm
Location: Arlington

Re: 26 states voice opposition to San Francisco home gun sto

Post by joe817 »

All I can say is that I'm thankful I don't live in California. And pleased to see so many Attorney's General submitting their documents SCOTUS for this stupid ordinance.
Diplomacy is the Art of Letting Someone Have Your Way
TSRA
Colt Gov't Model .380
airborned
Member
Posts: 139
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2013 2:49 pm

Re: 26 states voice opposition to San Francisco home gun sto

Post by airborned »

That is a rediclouse law. I'm glad other states are stepping in to help. How would you even enforce it without a warrant or unconstitutional search. :rules:
User avatar
baldeagle
Senior Member
Posts: 5240
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:26 pm
Location: Richardson, TX

Re: 26 states voice opposition to San Francisco home gun sto

Post by baldeagle »

The other states are not suing. They filed an amicus brief. IOW, they chose to provide the court with information they felt was relevant to the case and supported their position on gun control. Interestingly, I cannot find who is actually suing San Francisco. It has to be someone with standing, and I believe that would require that the plaintiff be a San Francisco resident. If I can find out who sued, I'll add to this reply.

BTW, they also banned hollow point ammunition.

Edit: The petitioners are ESPANOLA JACKSON; PAUL COLVIN; THOMAS BOYER; LARRY BARSETTI; DAVID GOLDEN; NOEMI MARGARET ROBINSON; NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA, INC.; SAN FRANCISCO VETERAN POLICE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION. The Amicus Brief was filed by The States of Nebraska, Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming. They are citing Heller and claiming there is no material difference between the San Francisco ordinance and the Washington, D.C. ordinance that was struck down in Heller.
The Constitution preserves the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation where the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. James Madison
NRA Life Member Texas Firearms Coalition member
User avatar
RogueUSMC
Senior Member
Posts: 1513
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 12:55 pm
Location: Smith County
Contact:

Re: 26 states voice opposition to San Francisco home gun sto

Post by RogueUSMC »

“Common sense dictates that in high stress, emergency situations, the ease and speed with which a person can utilize one of these mechanisms to unlock a safe drastically decreases,” the document reads. “It is common to fumble with keys while trying to hurriedly unlock a door, to forget a series of numbers when under pressure, or to struggle with hand-eye coordination when subjected to stressors.”
Is this supposed to be a selling point?
A man will fight harder for his interests than for his rights.
- Napoleon Bonaparte
PFC Paul E. Ison USMC 1916-2001
Post Reply

Return to “Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues”