gun store sales counter AR-15 customer
Shutterstock

From the Second Amendment Foundation . . .

Thursday’s ruling by U.S. District Judge Roger T. Benitez which struck down California’s ban on so-called “assault weapons” should have a direct impact on a similar ban in Washington, because both states are in the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court, the Second Amendment Foundation says.

“If a gun ban in California is unconstitutional,” SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb observed, “it is just as unconstitutional in Washington. We are eager to see this case through to what may become a Supreme Court confrontation, because we are confident that we will prevail. People who support gun bans, like California Gov. Gavin Newsom and Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson, are wrong on this important constitutional issue.”

The case is known as Miller v. Bonta, filed by SAF, the San Diego County Gun Owners Political Action Committee, California Gun Rights Foundation, Firearms Policy Coalition and four private citizens, including James Miller, for whom the case is named. They are represented by attorneys George M. Lee at Seiler Epstein, LLP and John W. Dillon at the Dillon Law Group, APC.

In his 79-page ruling, Judge Benitez wrote, “While criminals already have these modern semiautomatics, the state prohibits its citizens from buying and possessing the same guns for self-defense. At the same time these firearms are commonly possessed by law-abiding gun owners elsewhere across the country. Guns for self-defense are needed a lot because crime happens a lot.

A recent large-scale survey estimates that guns are needed defensively approximately 1,670,000 times a year. Another report, originally commissioned and long cited by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimated that there are between 500,000 and 3,000,000 defensive gun uses in the United States each year.”

“Judge Benitez’ ruling is a stinging rebuff to the gun prohibition movement,” said SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut. “His detailed discussion of the history of firearms regulation, along with his dismantling of the state’s arguments and assertions of its experts sends a signal that the days when gun banners could simply attack the Second Amendment without challenge are finished. We will take this challenge to the Supreme Court if necessary, as part of our commitment to restore firearms freedom, one lawsuit a time.”

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

50 COMMENTS

    • …if it goes to the Supreme Court, yeah. And I expect it to, eventually. I just hope Thomas is still on the court when it gets there, because the current plan seems to be to slow-walk it as much as they can get away with.

      • Would put me well into my 60’s and I would still fully expect to need to keep fighting to claw back/keep every right. We often forget just how much went into getting our rights in the first place and that it really is us against the world in keeping them.

  4. The ban/law should have been struck down long ago but better late than never.

    I sent a scathing letter to my goodguy congressman concerning the ongoing congressional clown show to elect a speaker…Good guy or worthless RINO please take a moment to call or write your congress person.

      • True enough at least while they are marking time they are not enacting any more onerous laws. We get enough of that type from ‘rules’ enacted by unelected bureaucrats.

        • As long as they fund our military and actually protect our borders fuck the rest of the agencies especially BATFECES.

      • True, HOWEVER that does not make either of these two types of Congress lawful or correct.

        How’s about we do away with the louts holding down exoensive furniture in tthe halls of Cngress and get some REAL Senators and Representatives that will UPHOLD and DEFEND the Constitution like we HIRE them to do?

        • “How’s about we do away with the louts holding down exoensive furniture in tthe halls of Cngress and get some REAL Senators and Representatives that will UPHOLD and DEFEND the Constitution like we HIRE them to do?”

          Can that even be imagined in a nation where the majority of voters are satisfied with politicians who have no interest in upholding a bunch of words that might limit their privilege.

    • “I sent a scathing letter to my goodguy congressman concerning the ongoing congressional clown show to elect a speaker…”

      Here’s a little reality check for you –

      If you spoke to your congress-critter in the same tone that you like speak to the folks here in TTAG, he-she-it likely never even saw the letter, their staff likely tossed it, or filed it away in a ‘potential threat’ file…

    • Yea a government freeze is the best way they can operate for the people right now. No more spending money or goofy laws being made

  6. One more post T Tag will trash and prevent me from posting. Joseph Goebbels would be proud of T Tag.

    quote———–A recent large-scale survey estimates that guns are needed defensively approximately 1,670,000 times a year. Another report, originally commissioned and long cited by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimated that there are between 500,000 and 3,000,000 defensive gun uses in the United States each year.”——-quote

    Mark Bryant, one of the attendees who also runs Gun Violence Archive wrote to CDC officials after their meeting, according The Reload, complaining of Kleck’s study. “It is highly misleading, is used out of context and I honestly believe it has zero value – even as an outlier point in honest DGU discussions.”

    https://www.nssf.org/articles/cdc-isnt-following-science-its-manipulating-it-for-gun-control/

    • But of course he did! It did not support his agenda! The problem for you is that subsequent studies have the same result.
      Same thing when the DOJ study found that there was no statistically significant evidence that the assault weapons ban had any effect on crime or homicide.They tried to bury that too.

    • Dackie Boyy go and read John Lott and HIS research. He started out trying to PROVE beyond any question that guns ARE the problem, that they are used almost exclusively against other people illegally and to cause harm. So he dove in to the RAW DATA. Did not take long before he was forced to confront the reality that constantly laughed in his face. The more he persued this study the ore he realised we’ve been fad a pack of lies
      He STILL does not really promote lack of gun control, he just finds data and puts it out there. YOU make you make up YOUR mind based on data.

      But I know you won’t because you are not here to repeat any truth.

      • to tionico

        quote——–read John Lott ——quote

        What a laugh quoting Lott who has been debunked as a charlatan by every accredited criminologist as nothing more than an money hungry opportunist and abject liar who preys upon the uneducated Far Right Fanatics. He tells the Far Right what they want to hear and rakes in the cash with his nonsensical books that every expert in the field has exposed as complete trash.

        • Really by who and when? Last I knew we still have him as the authority on the topic even here in NY.

    • What’s wrong now not adhering to THE SCIENCE™ your ilk have been bitching about for years?

    • Thank you for helping to sell another million guns, dacian.

      Of course you are just plain old fashioned stupid. Even after I tell you you will still not have a clue. Next to a conservative scotus you are one of our best allies.

    • Must be very saddening for you to not be able to genocide millions of fairly well armed Americans.

    • Must really upset you when courts uphold American citizens rights.

      Your post is still up. It appears no one is censoring you.

    • dacian, the DUNDERHEAD. That article you posted in your missive is PRO GUN! Context?
      JBOL!

  7. Ferguson and his gov signed on to a state democrat leadership pact during COVID. They became best buds and criminals in action using Soros’ resources for their thought process.

    The only thing missing from the Constitutions of every state is the people that put in place items found unconstitutional should have civil liability for all items especially those later to be found in violation.

    • you mean, there should be CONSEQUENCE for violating their oaths of office?
      Hoodathunk THAYAT??!!
      ??!!??

  8. Dan Zimmerman

    Can you put possibly put some really disgusting ads on your site? My laptop doesn’t show them so much but my phone has the best ones. Nasal polups and the woman grabbing her red crotch are my favorites. How about someone projectile vomiting! That would make my day. Yes I know this site is free but is this seriously the price we have to pay?

    • I’m getting the “Get Instantly Hard” adverts, kinda strange since that’s what I wake up to every morning… *mutter* 🙁

    • I don’t see anything on my phone running Brave browser. It totally strips ads 99% of the time and eliminates pop-ups and videos that run by themselves.

      • I see some especially funky ones here every day LoL. Some are just nuts, I’ve gotten to where i scroll down them really quickly to keep any pus covered scabs from creepin up on me

    • “Maybe not. Supreme Court Restores Biden’s ‘Ghost Gun’ Regulations In 5-4 Ruling”

      Did you bother to read it, Samuel?

      “The 5-4 ruling temporarily paused a lower court’s decision from last month that issued a nationwide block of the firearm definition rule and claimed the Biden Administration was overstepping its authority by adopting the rule.

      The case will move to a lower appeals court where oral arguments will be heard, potentially leading the ruling back to the Supreme Court.”

      TEMPORARILY…

  10. The Benitez decision is at best persuasive authority that may be cited in the Washington cases, but it is not binding authority on any other court. And in a year or two, the Ninth Circus will probably overrule it, and THAT decision will be binding on every other court in the circuit, at least until and if the Ninth is overruled by SCOTUS. Check back in a few years and we will find out then how it all turned out.

    • You’ve missed the point. He’s saying that as this case moves back up through the Ninth Circuit, whatever rulings they issue will also be binding on Washington State.

      Yes, there is probably a bit of a presumption on his part that the Ninth will adhere to Bruen, and that remains to be seen. Remember that’s the whole point of why we’re here, the case was sent BACK to the District court by the Ninth Circuit itself, “for further proceedings consistent with…” Bruen.

      But there are many “judges” on the Ninth Circuit who are simply not honorable people. They could very well be using this as nothing more than a stall tactic, as they have done for a very long time.

      • “Yes, there is probably a bit of a presumption on his part that the Ninth will adhere to Bruen”

        It’s presumptive to believe the 9th will adhere to any legal principle rather than make a predetermined, politically-motivated decision that has little relation to the facts or the law. There’s a reason that it’s called the “9th Circus” and is the most overturned.

    • Yeah, this. I like the SAF, but this is not going to affect Washington state in any real way. The Ninth Circuit is never going to apply Bruen correctly, so we’re just going to left waiting for SCOTUS to maybe, someday, intervene.

  11. Hey wait just a dog gone second, Attorney General Bob Ferguson says he has better lawyers and as such, is confident the laws will be upheld as constitutional. So what gives…besides the fact that AG Ferguson is a massive weasel?

  12. Well at this rate of progress, we can hope to see the Federal 1934 Gun Control Act (NFA) over turned in the year 2034. The Courts are moving way to slow. Wonder how long it would take to overturn a mass deportation order of illegal aliens or a state legalizing slavery???

Comments are closed.