Apparently some sanity still exists in the judiciary when it comes to gun rights. And it comes from one of the least likely places: California.
On Jan. 19 a Fresno Superior Court judge ruled that a California law that would have banned mail order ammunition sales and required all purchases of so-called “handgun ammunition” to be registered was unconstitutionally vague. The law was set to take effect Feb. 1, and the ruling means the burdensome and ill-conceived restrictions on the sales of ammunition will not be enforced.
The law, which was challenged by Tehama County Sheriff Clay Parker, the California Rifle and Pistol Association (CRPA), individuals and several ammunition sellers and suppliers, would have required that “handgun” ammunition be stored out of the reach of customers, that ammunition vendors collect ammunition sales registration information and thumb-prints from purchasers and conduct transactions face-to-face for all deliveries and transfers of “handgun ammunition.”
Superior Court Judge Jeffrey Hamilton ruled in favor of the plaintiff’s claims that the law failed to provide sufficient legal notice of what ammunition cartridges are “principally for use in a handgun,” and thus is considered “handgun ammunition” that is regulated under the law.
According to the CRPA’s Website, “Constitutional vagueness challenges to state laws are extremely difficult to win, particularly in California firearms litigation, so this success is particularly noteworthy.”
An appeal by the State is likely but, for a time, at least, someone in California actually understands what the 2nd Amendment means.