Franklin Armory v. California DOJ

[Aguila Blanca]

https://drive.franklinarmory.email/...m=Email&utm_campaign=61564f270fbb9b0010bc5e82

I wasn't aware of it, but apparently the California DOJ has been blocking the sale of firearms classified as "Other" in the state. For those who aren't aware, there is a subset of AR-15 pattern firearms that are neither rifles nor pistols. Under Federal rules, they are transferred as "Other."

It seems Franklin Armory sued the California DOJ, and the DOJ has [apparently] attempted to make the lawsuit moot by adding an "Other" classification to the form they require dealers to fill out. BUT ... they also defined what can be classified as 'Other," and guess what isn't included.

I hope Franklin Armory prevails. Those who live in California should probably follow the progress of this case.

 

[Lima Oscar 7]

This is interesting. I wonder if CA can use the 10th Amendment as their justification? This is to say: “Yes we allow firearms ownership but only on our terms.” Or, is the 2nd Amenement entirely the perview of the Federal Government?

 

[mehavey]

See "incorporation"

Fundamental rights rights and immunities protected by the Bill of Rights and interpreted by the Supreme Court as “implicit in the concept of ordered liberty,” and therefore protected against state governments in addition to the federal government.
https://www.khanacademy.org/humanit...tion/a/lesson-summary-selective-incorporation
>
> The Court declared... that the Second Amendment right to bear arms
> for self-defense is fundamental, and therefore incorporated to the states
> through the Fourteenth Amendment’s due process clause.
>