It’s kinda hard to believe, but Calguns — along with seven other pro-2A organizations — have decided to take on the nation’s best-looking attorney general. Why are the big bad gun rights boys beating up on the woman who was single-handedly bimbo-fied by the Commander in Chief? Good reason, actually: she’s actively thwarting law-abiding Californians’ constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms. We’ll let them explain it . . .

SAN CARLOS, CA – The Calguns Foundation has filed a lawsuit on behalf of seven California residents today against Attorney General Kamala Harris, the California Department of Justice, and DOJ Bureau of Firearms Chief Stephen Lindley. The case challenges the DOJ’s policy of requiring some firearm purchasers to prove their legal standing to take possession of acquired firearms and forcing them to wait beyond the statutory 10-day waiting period.

One plaintiff in the case, Daniel Schoepf of Long Beach, California, was denied his fundamental right to keep and bear arms for self-defense even after DOJ told him that he was legally eligible to purchase and possess firearms.

In 1984, Schoepf was detained in Los Angeles County for having two tablets in his pocket that were later discovered to be common, non-prescription pills. The detectives subsequently released Schoepf and no charges were filed. In 2006, DOJ firearms section Program Manager Steve Buford sent Schoepf a letter stating that he was eligible to purchase and possess firearms; however, in 2012, DOJ reversed that position and instructed Schoepf’s local firearms dealer to hold back delivery of Schoepf’s gun.

“I know I’m not alone in this, that DOJ is wrongly denying many Californians their Second Amendment rights just like they are mine,” said Schoepf. “I’m not a criminal and certainly not a disqualified convict but am a law abiding citizen with my Second Amendment rights fully intact. They left me no choice but to fight this injustice in court.”

“Over the past year, the DOJ has been directing California gun dealers to delay the release of firearms to people eligible to possess them – sometimes indefinitely,“ said Jason Davis, attorney for The Calguns Foundation. “The DOJ simply has no legal authority to justify their policy.”

The DOJ claims that these delays are primarily due to lack of information in their criminal history databases. In a July 2011 Los Angeles Times article, assistant attorney general Travis LeBlanc said the DOJ’s criminal records database system was “shoddy,” with the ‘guilty’, ‘not guilty’, or ‘case dismissed’ disposition information missing for about 7.7 million of the 16.4 million arrest records entered into the database over the last decade – and presumably much more for older cases.

“In essence, the DOJ is relying upon their improperly-maintained database to deny the fundamental rights of individuals,” said Gene Hoffman, Chairman of The Calguns Foundation. “That policy is entirely unacceptable and we look forward to putting an end to it.”

The attorney for plaintiffs in the lawsuit, Victor Otten, agrees.

“Our clients follow the law and so should the DOJ,” said Otten. “The DOJ is gleefully enforcing a policy that deprives my clients of their civil rights. The arrogance of the Department to think that it can abrogate the Constitution and statutory duties set by the Legislature is very unsettling.”

“This case really underscores the value of our DOJ Watch program,” said Brandon Combs, Executive Director of The Calguns Foundation. “Attorney General Harris’s hostility towards some civil rights predictably resulted in a shift away from former Attorney General Brown’s correct application of the law – and we are here to hold her accountable.”

The lawsuit is entitled Schoepf, et. al. vs. Kamala Harris, et. al. A copy of the complaint may be viewed or downloaded at http://www.calgunsfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/cgf_dros-delay-complaint.pdf.

The Calguns Foundation (www.calgunsfoundation.org) is a 501(c)3 non-profit organization which serves its members and the public by providing Second Amendment-related education, strategic litigation, and the defense of innocent California gun owners from improper or malicious prosecution. The Calguns Foundation seeks to inform government and protect the rights of individuals to acquire, own, and lawfully use firearms in California. Supporters may visithttp://www.calgunsfoundation.org/donate to join or donate to CGF.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

42 COMMENTS

  2. What? The government should follow the law? Inconceivable. The government is the law. The government is above the law. The government transcends the law. This is America, people. The law is irrelevant.

      • Looks are deceiving.She is screwed up in the head.Liberalism is a self inflicked mental disorder.(example)Liberals still love gun free zone schools.HUH?(See third sentence)But liberals like her will not put a gun free zone sign on their own front lawn!!!They put their ideology ahead of our and their childrens safety.They are hypocrites and would be tyrants.

    • well, i would let her have my gun, except for the Obama sloppy second image now in my head from a previous comment.

  7. They are probably now throwing her a party at the DOJ. Conragtulations! You’re being sued! You are now officially the AG!

  8. Obama’s attraction to this AG is purely ideological,…she’s a Lefty.
    Anyone Obama is attracted to, man or woman, must be Left in the loafers.
    This is how ideology before country manifests itself, with appointments
    of like-minded fellow travelers. All other considerations are secondary.

  9. Back when I lived in SF, AG Harris (then nicknamed K-Spice) once blew me a kiss from her car.

    When she was SF DA she warned that SF gun owners would be prosecuted if they were found to not have locked up their guns. We joked that she could come over and hand inspect our gun any Friday night.

  11. Good on Calguns! As a Californian I definitely appreciate their efforts. Now to wait about 3 years before this gets anywhere.

  12. when he ( Schopf or whatever) gets put on the stand… well him or anybody else anywhere dealing with this sort of thing… just needs to say “I plead the 2nd”, and I think they will be fine… right?

  14. Perhaps the most irksome part of her policy of denials when records are incomplete are that in many cases it seems that even had the buyer been convicted it would not have been a disqualifying conviction. Further, it seems to me that the burden of proof on a denial should be on the DOJ, yet the DOJ takes the position that if they don’t have proof in the system of the disposition of a case, it is the burden of the buyer to obtain the records necessary to clear up the inadequacy. And as noted, many of these cases are dismissed misdemeanors going back decades.

  15. To quote some guy named Martin Luther King:

    “A right delayed is a right denied.”

    The irony is so thick you can cut it with a chainsaw.

  17. Bimbofied? Planned or not, you know that political correct fart in a whirlwind was used to get her some national recognition. I expect she’ll be O’s nominee to replace Holder.

  18. “I will give them a really hot AG, then when they get screwed over by her, just looking at her will be a painkiller”-Obama, deep in AG selection though process.

    • Of course, Obama had nothing to do with Harris’s being California’s AG. She was voted into office by her fellow Californians. Obama didn’t “give” her to them.

  19. “… assistant attorney general Travis LeBlanc said the DOJ’s criminal records database system was “shoddy,” with the ‘guilty’, ‘not guilty’, or ‘case dismissed’ disposition information missing for about 7.7 million of the 16.4 million arrest records entered into the database over the last decade …”

    This is why we cannot trust government databases for functions such as background checks on firearms sales. And this is why our option to exercise a right cannot depend on government permission.

    • Ms Harris has a good resume on Wikipedia, but this may be relevant to the discussion on her approach to guns and the law:

      On August 24, 2012, the Los Angeles Times published an editorial calling on Harris to release Daniel Larsen from prison.[67] Larsen, who was sentenced to 28 years to life under California’s three strikes laws for possession of a concealed weapon in 1999, was declared actually innocent by a federal judge in 2010 and ordered released, but has remained in prison because Harris’ office has objected to his release on the grounds that he missed the deadline to file his writ of habeas corpus. The California Innocence Project, which has taken up Larsen’s case, has said this amounts to a paperwork technicality. The Times editorial stated that if Harris was not willing to release Larsen, Governor Jerry Brown should pardon him.

    • I was talking to the folks at a well regarded LGS, that was three weeks in the hole on new business, and couldnt take in gun-smithing work, because their routine periodic renewal was being held up the the State of CA. All the federal work was done, and their paperwork was completed by the state, but due to (whatever?) delay at the state, they were unable to do business other than parts and accessories off the shelf. This LGS happens to be the one most often recommended by local LEOs from surrounding cities as the best to deal with, longest reputation, etc.

      If CA cant pay its bills in general, is transferring prisoners from state to local jails to cover costs, and right now, cant find or update the licenses of the LAW-ABIDING because nearly 50% of the information from its 58 counties is missing or flawed, how will they be able to monitor or do this better in the future if they expand it, or add new provision to state law?

      And as CA goes, so goes the US. With only something like 11 states NOW providing info to the NCIS properly, are we to believe that the LAW -ABIDING will be better served, when this CA model, reportedly the best run in the nation, is exported for the FEDs, for Universal Background Checks?

      Essentially, this is confiscation by incompetence at best, or administrative manipulation, at worst- with a very timely practical example of how it works in action, and I think we can draw our own conclusions about whether ATF, or TSA, or anyone else at DHS can do the work properly.

Comments are closed.