D
DEF3
Guest
LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - A federal appeals court upheld California's assault weapons control act on Thursday, ruling that there is no constitutional right for individuals to keep and bear arms, the Los Angeles Times reported Friday.
The 3-0 decision, declaring that the 2nd Amendment protects only the right of states to organize and maintain militias, is at odds with the position of the Bush administration and a decision last year by a federal appeals court in New Orleans.
California adopted the nation's most sweeping assault weapons ban in 1999. It prohibits the manufacture, sale or import of weapons including grenade launchers, semiautomatic pistols with a capacity of more than 10 rounds, semiautomatic rifles that use detachable magazines and guns with barrels that can be fitted with silencers.
In February 2000, a month after the law took effect, a group of individuals who either own assault weapons or want to buy them challenged the law in U.S. District Court in Sacramento, contending that it violated the 2nd Amendment, the equal protection clause and other constitutional provisions.
U.S. District Judge William B. Shubb dismissed all of the plaintiffs' claims last year. Thursday's decision by the San Francisco-based U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld Shubb's ruling on the 2nd Amendment and one granting an exemption to the law for off-duty police officers. The appellate court overruled Shubb on another point, declaring that there was no rational basis for retired police officers to be exempt from the law.
California Atty. Gen. Bill Lockyer, whose office defended the state law in court, applauded the decision, which was also praised by attorneys for gun control organizations and denounced by leading gun owner associations, the Times said.
The plaintiffs could ask the full 9th Circuit to rehear the case or could directly appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, which has not ruled on the issue for more than 60 years.
The U.S. Justice Department under Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft has taken the position that individuals have a constitutional right to bear arms.
At issue is the meaning of the 2nd Amendment, which states: "A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
Copyright 2002 Reuters News Service. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
The 3-0 decision, declaring that the 2nd Amendment protects only the right of states to organize and maintain militias, is at odds with the position of the Bush administration and a decision last year by a federal appeals court in New Orleans.
California adopted the nation's most sweeping assault weapons ban in 1999. It prohibits the manufacture, sale or import of weapons including grenade launchers, semiautomatic pistols with a capacity of more than 10 rounds, semiautomatic rifles that use detachable magazines and guns with barrels that can be fitted with silencers.
In February 2000, a month after the law took effect, a group of individuals who either own assault weapons or want to buy them challenged the law in U.S. District Court in Sacramento, contending that it violated the 2nd Amendment, the equal protection clause and other constitutional provisions.
U.S. District Judge William B. Shubb dismissed all of the plaintiffs' claims last year. Thursday's decision by the San Francisco-based U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld Shubb's ruling on the 2nd Amendment and one granting an exemption to the law for off-duty police officers. The appellate court overruled Shubb on another point, declaring that there was no rational basis for retired police officers to be exempt from the law.
California Atty. Gen. Bill Lockyer, whose office defended the state law in court, applauded the decision, which was also praised by attorneys for gun control organizations and denounced by leading gun owner associations, the Times said.
The plaintiffs could ask the full 9th Circuit to rehear the case or could directly appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, which has not ruled on the issue for more than 60 years.
The U.S. Justice Department under Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft has taken the position that individuals have a constitutional right to bear arms.
At issue is the meaning of the 2nd Amendment, which states: "A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
Copyright 2002 Reuters News Service. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
