Not that this really matters, because it appears to me that the “4th District Court” of California is a California court. They have no say over Constitutional laws…. so there.
Go here for the full article: http://downtrend.com/71superb/aks-not-protected-by-2nd-amendment-says-ca-court/
On Monday the California 4th District Court Of Appeals ruled that 2nd Amendment does not apply to semi-automatic “AK” type rifles. They opined, “that the right secured by the Second Amendment is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose, but is instead the right to possess and carry weapons typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes such as hunting or self-defense.”
The court based its decision largely on the precedent set in the case of US v. Miller which allowed the banning of sawed-off shotguns on the grounds they had no military or civilian purpose. The court stated, “the ban on AK series rifles does not impinge on rights protected by the Second Amendment because assault weapons are at least as dangerous and unusual as the short-barreled shotgun.”
The case stems from the ultra-confusing Assault Weapons Control Act of 1989, which banned “AR” and “AK” series weapons. Subsequent court rulings said that the state couldn’t ban a type of weapon and must name the forbidden guns specifically by make and model. CA then adopted a list of weapons that were unwelcomed, but the manufactures simply renamed their rifles to get around the list. Finally in 2000 the state banned features like detachable magazines and pistol grips to keep these “assault weapons” illegal.
The defendant, William Zondorak, was busted with an AK-type weapon that appeared on the list of banned guns. Even though his rifle is identical to ones that are sold legally in California, because it was on the list, he’s in deep dog-doo. Any AK or AR receiver that is on the list, even if the gun has been reconfigured to meet CA standards, is still banned.
As if the California Assault Weapons Ban wasn’t stupid enough, this court ruling brings the state’s level of intelligence to an all-time low. First, they are saying that an AK has no lawful purpose such as hunting or self-defense. I don’t remember the part of the 2nd Amendment that restricts firearms ownership to these two usages. In any case an AK variant would be a great varmint gun and adequate for medium-sized game. It would have no problem ventilating someone stupid enough to enter a house without a back-stage pass. It has legitimate purposes.
- BREAKING: CA Court of Appeals: 2A Doesn’t Apply to AK Platform Rifles (thetruthaboutguns.com)
- CA Court of Appeals: 2A Doesnt Apply to AK Platform Rifles (nyfirearms.com)
- CA Republican: ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban ‘Erases’ Second Amendment (breitbart.com)
- CA Republican: ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban ‘Erases’ Second Amendment (ancestralyuba.com)
- AKs Not Protected By 2nd Amendment Says CA Court (downtrend.com)
- CA Court of Appeals Holds 2nd Amend Doesn’t Apply To Semi-auto Rifles (nyfirearms.com)
- California’s Legislature Says Hunting Rifles Are ‘Assault Weapons’ Because…Why Not? (reason.com)