since9
Campaign Veteran
On the one hand, the courts struck down the Federal ban on interstate handgun transfers.
On the other hand, California’s ban on new semiautomatic handguns that don’t stamp identifying information on the cartridge was upheld by a U.S. judge.
Am I stumbling over the obvious, here, or do these two rulings line up to accomplish the following:
1. Provides a very serious incentive for gun manufacturers to leave California and their blitheringly idiotic laws.
2. Provides yet another means by which Californians can readily obtain firearms from another state.
If I'm reading this right, California just potentially shut down ALL revenue from firearms manufacturing within their borders while doing absolutely NOTHING to curb crime within their borders.
Fortunately, they haven't actually managed to totally deprive the right of their citizens to protect life, limb, and property.
Yet...
On the other hand, California’s ban on new semiautomatic handguns that don’t stamp identifying information on the cartridge was upheld by a U.S. judge.
Am I stumbling over the obvious, here, or do these two rulings line up to accomplish the following:
1. Provides a very serious incentive for gun manufacturers to leave California and their blitheringly idiotic laws.
2. Provides yet another means by which Californians can readily obtain firearms from another state.
If I'm reading this right, California just potentially shut down ALL revenue from firearms manufacturing within their borders while doing absolutely NOTHING to curb crime within their borders.
Fortunately, they haven't actually managed to totally deprive the right of their citizens to protect life, limb, and property.
Yet...