San Diego City Council approves proposal to ban home-built firearms

1
San Diego City Council passes ordinance banning ghost gun kit sales
The proposal, called the E.N.U.F (Eliminate Non-Serialized Untraceable Firearm) Ordinance, will "prohibit the possession, purchase, sale, receipt, and transportation of non-serialized, unfinished frames and unfinished receivers, and non-serialized firearms within the City of San Diego." It was introduced last month by councilmember Marni Von Wilpert.

In a statement following the vote, Von Wilpert said, "The spread of untraceable ‘ghost guns’ is fueling gun violence in our city and today’s vote will help keep firearms out of the hands of people who pose danger to our communities—including violent criminals, domestic abusers, individuals suffering from mental illness, and terrorists."

Cate, who voted "no," said during the meeting, "this law does nothing to prevent mass shootings. This law does nothing to hold criminals accountable. This law does nothing to make us safer."
sbɐɯ ʎʇıɔɐdɐɔ pɹɐpuɐʇs ɟo ןןnɟ ǝɟɐs
ɯɯ6 bdd ɹǝɥʇןɐʍ
13ʞ
"ǝuıqɹɐɔ 1ɐ4ɯ" dɯɐʇsןןoɹ --- ɯoɔos0269ǝן ʇןoɔ
"ǝuıqɹɐɔ ʇuǝɯǝɔɹoɟuǝ ʍɐן sʇןoɔ" dɯɐʇsןןoɹ --- 0269ǝן ʇןoɔ
(béɟ) 59-pɯɐ

Re: San Diego City Council approves proposal to ban home-built firearms

4
San Diego used to be bright red with all the active duty military in that town along with military retirees . Times change, looks like the city council now is 9 Democrats and 1 Republican. The county is mixed. Without a state preemption law, cities and counties in CA can do their own thing.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: San Diego City Council approves proposal to ban home-built firearms

5
highdesert wrote:San Diego used to be bright red with all the active duty military in that town along with military retirees . Times change, looks like the city council now is 9 Democrats and 1 Republican. The county is mixed. Without a state preemption law, cities and counties in CA can do their own thing.
Yeah - thankfully, Ohio has statewide preemption. It used to be a patchwork of “cross this line and you are a felon” nonsense.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Re: San Diego City Council approves proposal to ban home-built firearms

6
San Diego bans sale, possession of ‘ghost gun’ components
SAN DIEGO — 
San Diego City Council on Tuesday passed an ordinance targeting ghost guns, making it illegal to buy and sell gun parts in the city that cannot be traced by law enforcement.

Ghosts guns are do-it-yourself firearms assembled by hand from parts that sometimes come in prepackaged kits. The parts are not classified as guns so they have no serial numbers, making them difficult if not impossible for law enforcement to track. Anyone can legally buy the parts.

The ordinance, which goes into effect Oct. 14, prohibits buying, selling or possessing the frame of an unfinished gun unless it has a serial number — treating the unfinished firearm part just like a completed firearm. A violation of the ordinance will be a misdemeanor.
To be clear they have banned things that are not firearms if those things that are not firearms lack serial numbers. Moreover, the serial numbers on those things that are not firearms aren't just serial numbers that _could_ be included on any part. They are serial numbers that would be reflected in the Disposition section of the manufacturing FFLs' bound books, which is something manufacturers don't do for things that are not firearms.
sbɐɯ ʎʇıɔɐdɐɔ pɹɐpuɐʇs ɟo ןןnɟ ǝɟɐs
ɯɯ6 bdd ɹǝɥʇןɐʍ
13ʞ
"ǝuıqɹɐɔ 1ɐ4ɯ" dɯɐʇsןןoɹ --- ɯoɔos0269ǝן ʇןoɔ
"ǝuıqɹɐɔ ʇuǝɯǝɔɹoɟuǝ ʍɐן sʇןoɔ" dɯɐʇsןןoɹ --- 0269ǝן ʇןoɔ
(béɟ) 59-pɯɐ

Re: San Diego City Council approves proposal to ban home-built firearms

7
FPC responds, though the organization will lose:
Fahr v. San Diego
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap ... 10.1.0.pdf
4. But in spite of the text of the Constitution and binding Supreme
Court precedents, Defendant City of San Diego enacted into law Ordinance
Number O-2022-7 (hereinafter the “Ordinance,” or the “Ban”), which, inter
alia, prohibits “possession, purchase, sale, receipt, and transportation of nonserialized, unfinished frames and unfinished receivers” (hereinafter “nonfirearm objects” or “NFO”s) by the over one million residents of, and all those
traveling through, the City of San Diego, under pain of criminal penalty.
7. By enacting the Ordinance, the City of San Diego willfully and
affirmatively disregarded the Supreme Court’s well-known and binding
Heller, McDonald, and Caetano decisions, which establish that the Second Amendment fully protects the right to self-manufacture, keep, and bear all such
arms in common use for lawful purposes based on the amendment’s text and
the history and tradition of our Nation.
9. Plaintiffs therefore bring this challenge because they
unquestionably face “a realistic danger of sustaining a direct injury as a result
of the law’s operation or enforcement,” Skyline Wesleyan Church v. Cal. Dep't
of Managed Health Care, 968 F.3d 738, 747 (9th Cir. 2020), seek to vindicate
their rights, and to preliminarily and permanently enjoin enforcement of the
Ordinance as required to conform the law to the Constitution’s text, our
Nation’s history and tradition, and the Supreme Court’s binding precedents.
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/60 ... alifornia/

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 3 guests