Second Amendment Foundation Files Constitutional Challenge Of California Assault Weapons’ Law

Second Amendment Foundation Files Constitutional Challenge Of California Assault Weapons' Law

Second Amendment Foundation
Second Amendment Foundation

BELLEVUE, WA –-(Ammoland.com)- The Second Amendment Foundation has filed a federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of California's ban on so-called “assault weapons,” claiming that the statute is “vague and ambiguous” in its definition of assault weapons, leading to the arrest of a California man on two different occasions.

SAF is joined in the lawsuit, which was filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, by the CalGuns Foundation and Brendan John Richards, an honorably-discharged Marine and Iraq war veteran, who was arrested and jailed in May 2010 and August 2011. On both occasions, charges against Richards were dismissed when it was determined that he had not violated the law because firearms in his possession on both occasions were not “assault weapons” as defined by California law. They are represented by attorneys Donald Kilmer of San Jose and Jason A. Davis of Mission Viejo.

Named as defendants in the lawsuit are California Attorney General Kamala Harris, the California Department of Justice, the Sonoma County Sheriff's Office and Deputy Greg Myers.

“It's an insult to be arrested once for violating a law that is so vague and ambiguous that law enforcement officers cannot tell the difference between what is and what is not a legal firearm under this statute,” said SAF Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb, “but to be arrested and jailed twice for the same offense is an outrage. Brendan Richards' dilemma is a textbook example of why the California statute should be nullified.

“On both occasions,” he continued, “Mr. Richards was jailed and had to post non-refundable bail fees. He lost work due to his incarcerations. In both cases, the same Senior Criminalist John Yount issued reports that the firearms in Richards' possession were not assault weapons' under California law. Mr. Richards now has a reasonable fear that his exercise of his fundamental Second Amendment rights will result in more wrongful arrests. We're delighted to step in, with the CalGuns Foundation, on his behalf.

“This nonsense has to stop,” Gottlieb stated, “and the only way to insure that is to show California's assault weapon statutes and regulations are unconstitutionally vague and ambiguous. Brendan Richards is not the only citizen faced with this kind of harassment under color of law.”

The Second Amendment Foundation (www.saf.org) is the nation's oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 650,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control. In addition to the landmark McDonald v. Chicago Supreme Court Case, SAF has previously funded successful firearms-related suits against the cities of Los Angeles; New Haven, CT; New Orleans; Chicago and San Francisco on behalf of American gun owners, a lawsuit against the cities suing gun makers and numerous amicus briefs holding the Second Amendment as an individual right.

2
Leave a Reply

Please Login to comment
2 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
2 Comment authors
OldHagOldMilitary Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
Notify of
OldHag
Guest
OldHag

The term "assault rifle" means it is an assault on our good nature, good democracy, good parenting. Get it?

OldMilitary
Guest
OldMilitary

I served 38 years in the Army and six hostile fire tours. I have never heard of an "assult rifle" except in political speach and news articles. No weapon is manufactured with that designation. I guess cave men had assult rocks and there were assult bows during the middle ages.