Entering text into the input field will update the search result below

Federal judge overturns California ban on assault weapons

Jun. 07, 2021 7:40 AM ETSmith & Wesson Brands, Inc. (SWBI)OLN, SWBI, RGR, SPWH, VSTO, POWWBy: Yoel Minkoff, SA News Editor76 Comments

Weapons and military equipment for army, Assault rifle gun (M4A1) and pistol on camouflage background.
Photo by Artfully79/iStock via Getty Images

  • U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez of San Diego overturned California's longtime ban on assault weapons on Friday by issuing a permanent injunction so the law cannot be enforced.
  • The ban has been in

Recommended For You

Comments (76)

Have a tip? Submit confidentially to our News team. Found a factual error? Report here.

n
Newsome whines about the courts allowing sporting rifles, but encourages illegals to come to his state. How many US citizens have died at the hands of illegals be it murder, DUIs, drug overdose, etc? Newsome is just another two-face liberal desperately trying to maintain his power. It is becoming evident that US citizens living in the state of CA are finally awakening....
Joe de Mencia profile picture
@nhsully88 " It is becoming evident that US citizens living in the state of CA are finally awakening...."

that's a little too optimistic, but i'll believe it when they recall this american psycho-looking individual.
DrP79 profile picture
@Zhou Bi Den

gun sales surge 60% even in CA

www.19fortyfive.com/...
a
@Zhou Bi Den Not all of us here are nutcases. This judge is incredible and speaks for many of us. Hopefully Newsom is gone soon and isn't replaced by someone worse (I imagine that's a pipe dream, however)
P
What is not generally known is that the rank-and-file police have very different viewpoints and opinions than the POLICE CHIEFS. The reason is simple: most chiefs are APPOINTED by mayors, and in Amurka almost all mayors are Democrats and Liberal. Therefore, as a POLITICAL APPOINTEE, he serves at the whim of the mayor. Most police chiefs in America are either whore clowns or a-fear-motive ack-shun recipient. Their opinions are tainted.

In this definitive article-difficult to find with today's search engine al gore rhythms-the truth rises to the top: In John Lott's book, The War On Guns, www.nationalreview.com/... he states:

"Research in my new book, The War on Guns, shows that each one-percentage-point increase in gun ownership is associated with a 3.6 percent decrease in the number of police killed. Clinton and Obama keep pushing for background checks on private transfers of guns, but using data from the handful of states that mandate such checks, I found no relationship between tighter restrictions and the number of police shot to death in the years 2000–2014."

"Jackson’s claim about open-carry laws is simply wrong. From 2013 to 2015, the six states (plus the District of Columbia) that banned open carry actually experienced higher rates of police death (20.2 versus 17.3 per 100,000 officers)."

"Take the survey just released last week by the National Association of Chiefs of Police. After polling more than 20,000 sheriffs and chiefs of police, the NACOP found that 86.4 percent “support nationwide recognition of state issued concealed weapon permits” and 76 percent believe that “qualified, law-abiding armed citizens help law enforcement reduce violent criminal activity.”

There is probably no group that supports private gun ownership more than the police do.

Rank-and file-police show even stronger support for private gun ownership. PoliceOne, an organization of about 380,000 active and 70,000 retired officers, surveyed 16,000 members on the subject in 2013.

Virtually all of the survey’s respondents said the “assault-weapons” ban, “a federal ban on ammunition magazines that hold more than ten rounds,” background checks on private transfers of guns, and “a national database tracking all legal gun sales” would either do no good or actually cause harm."

NOTHING in the World causes the Left, Liberals, Progressives, et.al consternation and discombobulation than FACTS, EVIDENCE, AND DATA.

This miserable, mentally disturbed ilk run from the Real like a vampire avoids mirrors and garlic.
v
@Poupon Marks - I think in order to for us to have a better view on this politically charged topic we should review research on gun violence from other sources, especially those that might contradict our pre-existing opinions and priors.
I would recommend that anyone who's open minded on understanding gun violence reads not only John Lott's research and books, but also research by others who study this issue (e.g. John Donahue, Carlisle E. Moody, Ted Goertzel, Ian Ayres).
DrP79 profile picture
even the CDC supported Lott's Thesis
- more guns = less crime
- that millions of gun owners STOPPED crimes
- often the mere presence of a weapon was sufficient
- without even firing a shot

Yet as that was unpopular with their political leaders
- they HID their report for years
P
@vkncaa Your sources are compromised by politics, unsupported opinion, and irrelevant obfuscation.

Fast Facts: Gary Kleck. www.thoughtco.com/...
Known For: Gun violence statistician
Born: March 2, 1951 in Lombard Illinois
Parents: William and Joyce Kleck
Education: Bachelor of Arts (1973), Masters Degree (1975), Ph.D. (1979); all in Sociology from the University of Illinois in Urbana
Published Works: "Point Blank: Guns and Violence in America," "Targeting Guns: Firearms and Their Control," "The Great American Gun Debate: Essays on Firearms and Violence," and "Armed: New Perspectives on Gun Control"
Awards and Honors: 1993 Winner of the Michael J. Hindelang Award of the American Society of Criminology

Kleck has spent his entire career at Florida State University’s School of Criminology, beginning as an instructor and eventually becoming a professor at the College of Criminology and Criminal Justice in 1991. That same year, he authored his first book, "Point Blank: Guns and Violence in America."

He won the American Society of Criminology’s Michael J. Hindelang award in 1993 for the book. In 1997, he authored "Targeting Guns: Firearms and Their Control." The same year, he joined Don B. Kates to publish "The Great American Gun Debate: Essays on Firearms and Violence." In 2001, Kleck and Kates teamed up again for "Armed: New Perspectives on Gun Control."

Kleck’s first submission to a peer-reviewed journal on the subject of gun control was in 1979, when he penned an article on capital punishment, gun ownership, and homicide for the American Journal of Sociology. Since then, he has written more than 24 articles for various journals on guns and gun control. He has also published countless newspaper articles and position papers throughout of his career.

Kleck's Survey Findings
Kleck surveyed 2,000 households across the nation, then extrapolated the data to reach his findings. In the process, he managed to shatter previous survey claims. He found that guns are used far more often for self-defense than they are used to commit crimes.
For every use of a gun to commit a crime, there are three to four cases of guns used in self-defense.
Assault and robbery rates are lower when victims are armed with a gun.
A gun is used in self-defense to protect its owner from crime 2.5 million times per year, an average of once every 13 seconds.
15% of gun defenders interviewed believed that someone would have died if they had not been armed. If true, that’s an average of one life saved due to firearm self-defense every 1.3 minutes.
In nearly 75% of cases, the victim did not know their attacker(s).
In nearly 50% of cases, victims faced at least two attackers, and in nearly 25%, there were three or more attackers.
25% of incidents of self-defense occurred away from the home.
Kleck’s Legacy
Kleck’s National Self-Defense Survey findings provided strong arguments for concealed carry laws and keeping guns in the home for defensive purposes. It also provided a counterargument to surveys claiming that keeping firearms for self-defense was inadvisable because they posed dangers to gun owners and their families.​ Marvin Wolfgang, a noted criminologist who favored a ban on all firearms, even for law enforcement officers, said that Kleck's survey was nearly foolproof:

“What troubles me is the article by Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz. The reason I am troubled is that they have provided an almost clear-cut case of methodologically sound research in support of something I have theoretically opposed for years, namely, the use of a gun in defense against a criminal perpetrator…I do not like their conclusions that having a gun can be useful, but I cannot fault their methodology.”

Kleck's Survey Findings
Kleck surveyed 2,000 households across the nation, then extrapolated the data to reach his findings. In the process, he managed to shatter previous survey claims. He found that guns are used far more often for self-defense than they are used to commit crimes.
For every use of a gun to commit a crime, there are three to four cases of guns used in self-defense.
Assault and robbery rates are lower when victims are armed with a gun.
A gun is used in self-defense to protect its owner from crime 2.5 million times per year, an average of once every 13 seconds.
15% of gun defenders interviewed believed that someone would have died if they had not been armed. If true, that’s an average of one life saved due to firearm self-defense every 1.3 minutes.
In nearly 75% of cases, the victim did not know their attacker(s).
In nearly 50% of cases, victims faced at least two attackers, and in nearly 25%, there were three or more attackers.
25% of incidents of self-defense occurred away from the home.
Kleck’s Legacy
Kleck’s National Self-Defense Survey findings provided strong arguments for concealed carry laws and keeping guns in the home for defensive purposes. It also provided a counterargument to surveys claiming that keeping firearms for self-defense was inadvisable because they posed dangers to gun owners and their families.​ Marvin Wolfgang, a noted criminologist who favored a ban on all firearms, even for law enforcement officers, said that Kleck's survey was nearly foolproof:

“What troubles me is the article by Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz. The reason I am troubled is that they have provided an almost clear-cut case of methodologically sound research in support of something I have theoretically opposed for years, namely, the use of a gun in defense against a criminal perpetrator…I do not like their conclusions that having a gun can be useful, but I cannot fault their methodology.”

Unpublished CDC Study Confirms More than 2 Million Defensive Handgun Uses Annually

An unpublished Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) study confirms Florida State University criminologist Gary Kleck’s findings of more than two million defensive handgun uses (DGUs) per year.

Since the early 1990s, Kleck has maintained that there is a minimum of 760,000 DGUs annually. However, that is his low estimate. Kleck and research partner Marc Gertz have contended the actual number is closer to 2.5 million, reported Breitbart.

Kleck reaffirmed his numbers on February 17, 2015, explaining that while plenty of naysayers have criticized his findings, none have been able to offer empirical evidence to counter them.

Now, a CDC study conducted on data from 1996, 1997, and 1998 has been uncovered. The study, which was never released to the public, shows approximately 2.46 million DGUs per year.

One has to ask why the studies were left unpublished? Duuuh.......

On April 20, 2018, Reason magazine quoted Kleck’s reaction to the unpublished CDC findings; he explained that a figure of 2.46 million DGUs a year “[implies] that guns were used defensively by victims about 3.6 times as often as they were used offensively by criminals.”
k
Well, there goes CA's ban on home defense and sporting rifles.

Real stats:

ucr.fbi.gov/...
P
One is to be forgiven if one is persuaded by news media and others that the nation is awash with murderous AR-15 assault rifles. The facts, however, do not support this hyperbole, and facts matter," he wrote. "Like the Swiss Army Knife, the popular AR-15 rifle is a perfect combination of home defense weapon and homeland defense equipment. Firearms deemed as 'assault weapons' are fairly ordinary, popular, modern rifles."

C'mon Joe, ban menthol cigarettes, AR-15s and bitcoin. Do the right thing.
d
@Phil Dumfee And tax the poor with continual money printing. Hey look, vax lotteries, even more hopelessness for the poor! But muh AR15s are the problem....Psssh, our country is so toast.
d
But you see, this judge's opinion is irrelevant [in their minds], so the leftist mobs will appeal. However, they have no issue accepting a ruling if its in favor of their "progressive" views. This judge is being painted as a right wing zealot-NRA mouthpiece now. Until SCOTUS comes down with an undisputable ruling, we will live in this limbo.

"High Capacity" and "Assault" weapons are such ambiguous trash terminology.
Joe de Mencia profile picture
@dandroidz it's like when McCain was called a maverick for going against his party, but now Manchin is some neo n-word r-word. you can't win with these people.
d
@Zhou Bi Den Yep, cheered for the "Maverick", who somehow had the mental cognition to vote after partial brain surgery...uhhh ok
t
So many comments here are going against the views of police officers:

From Intl. Assoc. of Police Chiefs:

Semi-Automatic assault weapons are routinely the weapons of choice for gang members and drug dealers. They are regularly encountered in drug busts and are all too often used against police officers.
The IACP has been a strong supporter of the assault weapons ban since 1992, and our membership has approved several reauthorizations of support in the years since. The membership took this action because we, as law enforcement executives, understand that the criminal use of semiautomatic assault weapons pose a grave risk to our officers and the communities they are sworn to protect.
e
@trentbridge
""So many comments here are going against the views of police officers""

You engage in the logical fallacy of Appeal to Authority to argue that the rights of peaceful gun owners should be infringed. It doesn't work, or even come close to working. Do you have another argument that is valid?
d
@trentbridge Look. If the police want to turn back their military funds for humvees, huge weapon caches, armored personnel carriers, SWAT teams, task force teams, and other escalated "Federalization" via $$$, then sure, take our ARs or AKs. When the Po-po are wielding 12 ga shotguns and 9mm exclusively, we can discuss "assault" weapons bans or limitations. Civilians are ENTITLED AND PROTECTED WITH INALIENABLE rights to maintain equal grounds with the Govt and police in arms. Period. I dont care about some woke lefty cop union organization
v
@excenter - I agree that @trentbridge comment can interpreted as Appeal to Authority, as long as there's strong evidence that the "authority's" opinion is not based on sound evidence/rationale and if he clearly states that the authority's opinion must be true.

Please note that @tentbridge did not say that "because an authority says so it must be true" (definition of appeal to authority) - he said "So many comments here are going against the views of police officers" which actually points to inconsistency of opinions on this subject. By such, one might interpret your comment as committing the logical fallacy called Strawman Argument, or misrepresenting/misinterpreting someone's argument to make it easier to attack.

BTW, by using this logic, commending the federal judge for making the ruling or Founding Fathers for writing the 2nd Amendment could also be interpreted as appeal to authority.
Yuppp profile picture
The US Constitution gets temporarily twisted & ignored by many on both the left and right constantly, but it always wins in the end.
d
@Yuppp And its pretty basic in its language. Thank god its not written in iambic pentameter-Shakespearean lingo. But the anti-freedom crowd still manage to twist terms such as "shall not be infringed", really confusing stuff, gotta love public school education...
itschrisolson profile picture
What is an "assault weapon?" I own many firearms, but I have never once heard this term.

Probably something made up by the uniformed liberal media to make guns seem scary and dangerous. Guns do not kill people. They're just pieces of metal. That's it. Do your stainless steel appliances kill people? They're also metal.
e
@itschrisolson Of course it's a made up name by the anti gunners to control the dialogue. Benitez wrote the following brilliant explanation -

The plaintiffs successfully argued that California's use of the term 'assault weapons' was 'a politically-concocted pejorative term designed to suggest that there is an inherently unlawful or illegitimate basis for owning otherwise common firearms protected by the Second Amendment.'

They added that California banned guns which should have been lawful to own by designating them assault weapons using faulty rationales, such as a rifle's ammunition capacity.
S
@itschrisolson It varies by state, but you can find California's definition easily online if you're actually interested and not simply trolling.
e
@Steelkilt81 "It varies by state"

It certainly does! And does this not indicate that really, there is no definition of what that actually is?
m
Morons is the one thing America has no supply issues with.
DrP79 profile picture
The Supreme Court held in 1939 US v Miller
- that militarily useful weapons were the most constitutionally protected
d
@DrP79 History shmishtory in the eyes of lefty woke gangs. The only historical rulings they love are the income tax legality and Roe v Wade. They dont really love the Civil Rights Act and ending slavery, due to the high Democrat opposition, but hey, history smishtory.
I hear you judge.Never know when the Brits might return.
J
@june1234 tyranny is all across the world and has been throughout history. The blind can see it but utopians cannot
F
@june1234 You certainly have no idea when the Looters & arsonists are coming for your business.
d
Seeking Alpha bows to the woke mob by accepting the misnomer term, "assault" weapon.
d
@dixie I know right, what is an assault weapon? Are we talking scissors? Knives? Baseball bats, I get really confused. Only when they sprinkle "high capacity" do I realize theyre talking about my air powered nail gun
@dixie Thats what the law not seeking alpha calls it. Penal Code 30600 PC is the California statute that makes it a crime to manufacture, distribute, transport, import, sell or give away assault weapons and BMG rifles.
E
EdMc
08 Jun. 2021
@june1234, that's just circular reasoning. What makes a particular firearms an "assault weapon"? There was a definition, coin by the Germans during WWII. The California "definition", such as it is, goes way beyond that. Moreover David Chipman made up one of his own, that takes in even old hunting arms such as the Winchester 100 and Browning's BAR (not the m1918 military weapon). That's the problem, the "legal" "definition" is unconstitutionally squishy, and gets reinterpreted every time some hack wants to scoop up more of the people's arms.
To ensure this doesn’t happen in the future, please enable Javascript and cookies in your browser.
Is this happening to you frequently? Please report it on our feedback forum.
If you have an ad-blocker enabled you may be blocked from proceeding. Please disable your ad-blocker and refresh.