ConditionThree
State Pioneer
imported post
In D.C., residents werent allowed handguns and could notpossess assembled and functional firearms in their homes. The Heller ruling makes such bans unconstitutional.
In California, we are being told by some authorities that ammunition in the proximity of the firearm is a 'loaded weapon', and thus a violation of the law. In reality, 12031 bans the assembly of a operational firearm by criminalizing possession of a firearm that is loaded- that is to say ammunition attached to a firearm in a position to fire.
Now if a firearm cannot operate without ammunition, and the ammunition is an integral part of the mechanism of a firearm- how is12031 different than D.C.'s ban on assembled firearms in the home? More specifically, when is the weapon completed? Is a firearm nothing but paperweight without ammunition? Isnt a firearm only completed when ALL of the parts are assembled in a position to function as it was designed.
I'm wondering if this could be successfully argued.... thoughts?
In D.C., residents werent allowed handguns and could notpossess assembled and functional firearms in their homes. The Heller ruling makes such bans unconstitutional.
In California, we are being told by some authorities that ammunition in the proximity of the firearm is a 'loaded weapon', and thus a violation of the law. In reality, 12031 bans the assembly of a operational firearm by criminalizing possession of a firearm that is loaded- that is to say ammunition attached to a firearm in a position to fire.
Now if a firearm cannot operate without ammunition, and the ammunition is an integral part of the mechanism of a firearm- how is12031 different than D.C.'s ban on assembled firearms in the home? More specifically, when is the weapon completed? Is a firearm nothing but paperweight without ammunition? Isnt a firearm only completed when ALL of the parts are assembled in a position to function as it was designed.
I'm wondering if this could be successfully argued.... thoughts?
