SB-23 violation of Equal Protection Rights?

[shopkeep]

FIRST OFF: disclaimer, I'm NOT an attorney nor a legal proffessional. That's my wife's forray. I am, as an oppressed gun owner, much like the rest of us all in this boat in the PRK much more intune to legal lingo than the general public.

So basically, what I'm about to argue is based completely on the arguement being made inside the suit against Proposition H. Chris Daly opened up a new can of worms with H because it allows NON-Residents to have handguns within city limits (which he says makes this one legal unlike the 1982 ban). But this can be argued to be a violation of Equal Protection Rights because there is no rational claim within the city that somehow non-residents are more responsible, better shots, less prone to use a handgun, etc.

But because Equal Protection Laws exist on a FEDERAL level as well, can it not be argued that those who possess "Assault Weapons" also have their rights violated in the same manner? Afterall it's true that a Nevada, Arizona, or Texas resident is free to bring to California for purposes of target shooting or competition an AR-15 or other "Assault Weapon" as a non-resident without committing a felony. Yet if a resident was to posses such a firearm it would be considered a felony due to the ban.

Anyone else have any input on this one?

[delloro]

I don't see the equal protection argument winning either case. not sure it should, either. as to a rational relationship, well, the SC accepts almost anything for that, so forget it.

not everybody is guaranteed equal rights for everything, and that's the law.

[Turbinator]

But can a non resident really bring an AW into this state? From my understanding of CA law, unless special permission is granted, this is not allowed.

Turby

[delloro]

yes, on their way to a sanctioned match

[PanzerAce]

hmmm, sounds sort of plausible, but get a lawyer to go over it and tell you if it would work or not.

[shopkeep]

In any event though you have to admit that out of the Prop H suit and other extremist bans being sued in court there is going to be some favorable case law that comes into play for us in the future.