PDA

View Full Version : Report from San Francisco - Prop H hearing


1911_sfca
02-23-2006, 2:40 PM
Well I just got back from the court, and then lunch with one of the Coalition Against Prohibition members, all ready to type up a summary.

However I noticed that someone who was sitting near me in court already e-mailed out a summary, which is good, so I'll just repost it here.

My favorite exchange was when Chuck Michel was having a back-and forth about what transferring a handgun means, then he said, about ammunition transfers that "you don't get it back - the person goes and uses it", and the judge replied, "Well, you hope you don't get it back."

I was impressed by the list of questions that the judge gave both sides, at the beginning of the hearing, to address. Both Chuck Michel (he spoke 99% of the time, with Don Kates standing up to clarify a few points), and Snodgrass, who spoke for the City Attorney, made good presentations and good points.

The judge asked thoughtful and intelligent questions. My gut feeling is that he will overturn part 3, the handgun possession ban, and he did ask for arguments on severability, so it's possible that he may sever the legislation to keep part 2, the sales/transfer ban, or part of it, but I didn't get a strong feeling one way or the other based on his questions/comments. This is definitely not a "kangaroo" court,

Chuck Michel made some funny comments to the press after the case, especially when they asked what the rest of the country thought of this. He said he has been watching the national news, and...pause...San Francisco has done some things that are not so "appreciated" by the rest of the country (paraphrase). The whole press corps laughed on this one.

Here is the summary of the proceedings as already posted. I may add some more points as things pop back into my head.

---
The oral presentation, from both sides, went from 10:25 to 12:00. The arguments are pretty much what one might expect. They argued back and forth about home rule, state preemption, whether a "license" consists of a piece of paper, and whether restrictions on firearms/ammunition placed on property that was, or was not, analogous to 'private' property, and whether court rulings on a county's restrictions on use of ITS fairgrounds broke the state preemption rules in the same way Prop H wishes to reach into our homes. Of course the city made cry-me-a-river sob story arguments about the dangers of having a handgun in the home, and how voters just want to make the city safer. And there were arguments from [our] side about the volumes of legislation the State spent 90 years studying, discussing, and testing, for the purpose of preventing guns from getting into the wrong hands, while making sure they stay in the right hands. There were also discussions about separability (one article being struck not affecting the other articles). Nothing earth-shattering came from any of these.

The judge (Judge Warren?) closed today by asking for all parties to submit their Proposed Statement of Decision in writing. For everyone's convenience, the due date for this submission is set for March 20th, 2006, 9:30am. At that time, the court will consider those propositions, but there is no need for any of the parties to actually appear before the court at that time.

Because these proceedings will be going long past the March 1st enforcement deferral date, the judge has requested (not ordered - this is not an injunction) that the city please extend this date, and _also_ the April 1st handgun ban date. The attorney for the city said he would take this request to his client, but he was "optimistic" that this would be done.

So the summary is:
- March 20th is the submission deadline for Proposed Statements of Decision by all parties.
- On the Judge's request, the city attorney is "optimistic" that the March 1st and the April 1st Prop H dates will be pushed farther into the future, to allow for court proceedings.

caduckgunner
02-23-2006, 2:46 PM
Thanks for the detailed report!

McMadCow
02-23-2006, 2:50 PM
Yay! I can keep my handgun after April 1st!
But I will surely turn it in the very moment the city asks me to... :rolleyes:

Thanks for the update!

1911_sfca
02-23-2006, 3:10 PM
One other amusing exchange.. I was standing next to a CRPA official who was speaking with a reporter from a very liberal local radio station. He was noting how he used to live in London, and how home invasion robberies and firearms crimes are very high there now. "But, I thought they don't have guns there anymore" was her response. Made me chuckle..

Rumpled
02-23-2006, 3:18 PM
Severability is scary on this one.
This has bothered me ever since it passed and people said that it will get struck down by the courts.
Even if the handgun ban doesn't go into effect, all of the other parts will still be pretty bad.

rips31
02-23-2006, 4:41 PM
Yay! I can keep my handgun after April 1st!
lol...not officially. according to what was posted, 01 march is still the enforcement date. :rolleyes:

thanks for the info, 1911.

stator
02-23-2006, 5:07 PM
My only question is did Chuck Michel say he had to run because he needed to get our lowers back from the DOJ??????????????????????????

shopkeep
02-23-2006, 5:28 PM
Lets hope this whole law gets shut down. If _ANY_ part of it survives, expect that part to resurface in Los Angeles soon.

HEUER
02-23-2006, 5:31 PM
Good Job! Very Well Done!

bu-bye
02-23-2006, 6:08 PM
Very nice report. thanks for being our eyes and ears :)

dwtt
02-23-2006, 8:20 PM
Severability is scary on this one.
This has bothered me ever since it passed and people said that it will get struck down by the courts.
Even if the handgun ban doesn't go into effect, all of the other parts will still be pretty bad.
What's even more scary is if this ban gets to the state level, you know Leno, Goldberg, and the other democrats will put it onto the floor. Then we're all really screwed. I know people will say that can't happen, they'll never pass such a ban. Well, that's what a lot of people in SF said about Prop H.

RRangel
02-23-2006, 8:22 PM
What's even more scary is if this ban gets to the state level, you know Leno, Goldberg, and the other democrats will put it onto the floor. Then we're all really screwed. I know people will say that can't happen, they'll never pass such a ban. Well, that's what a lot of people in SF said about Prop H.

And the assault weapon ban, .50 BMG....

filefish
02-23-2006, 8:58 PM
when I first read this I thought it said "Prep H", fitting

1911_sfca
02-24-2006, 11:50 AM
My only question is did Chuck Michel say he had to run because he needed to get our lowers back from the DOJ??????????????????????????

LOL.. nah, he said he had a plane to catch back to LA. I mentioned the Milpitas thingie to him, but I have a feeling his mind was 100% on the case at hand....

1911_sfca
02-24-2006, 11:52 AM
Severability is scary on this one.
This has bothered me ever since it passed and people said that it will get struck down by the courts.
Even if the handgun ban doesn't go into effect, all of the other parts will still be pretty bad.

I view severability as annoying, but not scary. Possession ban in your own home is scary. There is only one gun store in SF anyway -- if they ban sales, just drive 5 or 10 miles south, buy there, and bring it back. The transfer ban is a little worse, IMO...

But the fact of the matter is that we already lost ground on the CRPA west hollywood case, and to some extent on the Western Tradeshow (alameda county gun show ban). Both of those came up at the hearing. Doe was also a popular case to be cited.

1911_sfca
02-24-2006, 11:59 AM
But I will surely turn it in the very moment the city asks me to... :rolleyes:

I really wish the judge had asked how many handguns have been turned in so far... I was curious on that one!

bwiese
02-24-2006, 12:28 PM
I really wish the judge had asked how many handguns have been turned in so far... I was curious on that one!

Few, if any, will turn in handguns. Many will just be moved to out-of-city/county places like RentASpaces in South SF or Daly City, and Jackson Arms in SSF might, for example, offer storage lockers.

Expect to see higher demand for Mossberg 500s and Remington 870s as part of the "law of unintended consequences".

(Remember when the 10rd mag ban came out in '94? That drove the concept of things like pocket 45ACP guns like the ParaOrdnance P10 and micro Glocks.)

mblat
02-24-2006, 12:33 PM
I really wish the judge had asked how many handguns have been turned in so far... I was curious on that one!

Besides - you can always sell your handgun if you want to get rid of it. Why just turn it in?

MrTuffPaws
02-24-2006, 1:39 PM
So if the judge rules against prop H, will he then be an activist judge because he went against the will of the people? :D

mikey357
02-25-2006, 4:39 PM
But the fact of the matter is that we already lost ground on the CRPA west hollywood case, and to some extent on the Western Tradeshow (alameda county gun show ban). Both of those came up at the hearing. Doe was also a popular case to be cited.[/QUOTE]

By the west hollywood case, are you referring to the SNS ban that Koretz managed to push through? I believe the city had to repeal that law because AB 15 passed on the state level and the SNS ban conflicted with state law.
San Francisco also had a similar law passed concerning AW's and when Roberti Roos and SB 15 passed SF also had to repeals its AW ban because that also conflicted with state law.

mikey357
02-25-2006, 4:41 PM
So if the judge rules against prop H, will he then be an activist judge because he went against the will of the people? :D


We dont live in a pure democracy, so the will of the people doesnt trump all.

Jaredg
02-27-2006, 8:23 PM
If I wanted to go to the next prop H hearing what info do I need?

1911_sfca
02-27-2006, 9:40 PM
If I wanted to go to the next prop H hearing what info do I need?

On March 20, both sides are going to submit a proposed ruling. Some time within 90 days after that, the judge is going to issue his ruling, which will be posted here.

It's pretty much guaranteed this will go to the Appeals court, so if and when that is scheduled, that will be the next hearing that's expected, which you could attend. I'll post info on that here too, so stay posted on this forum.

rips31
02-27-2006, 11:17 PM
Few, if any, will turn in handguns. Many will just be moved to out-of-city/county places like RentASpaces in South SF or Daly City, and Jackson Arms in SSF might, for example, offer storage lockers.

Expect to see higher demand for Mossberg 500s and Remington 870s as part of the "law of unintended consequences".

(Remember when the 10rd mag ban came out in '94? That drove the concept of things like pocket 45ACP guns like the ParaOrdnance P10 and micro Glocks.)
lol...as soon as prop h passed, i bought my remy 870. of course, i'm not gonna give up my gals, either. but, a deputy chief of police that i work with told me (unofficially, of course) that i wouldn't hafta worry b/c none of the sfpd officers he knows will even bother to enforce it.

mikey357
02-28-2006, 6:01 PM
On March 20, both sides are going to submit a proposed ruling. Some time within 90 days after that, the judge is going to issue his ruling, which will be posted here.

It's pretty much guaranteed this will go to the Appeals court, so if and when that is scheduled, that will be the next hearing that's expected, which you could attend. I'll post info on that here too, so stay posted on this forum.

I wonder if there is any way to prevent it from going to appeals if CCSF loses.
Could there be any way to get the news out that going to appeals is just going to burn off a lot of money that could go to other things in SF? SF has plenty of programs that want a few extra dollars, could other groups be persuaded to put some heat on the Board of Supes.

1911_sfca
03-01-2006, 10:30 AM
I wonder if there is any way to prevent it from going to appeals if CCSF loses.
Could there be any way to get the news out that going to appeals is just going to burn off a lot of money that could go to other things in SF? SF has plenty of programs that want a few extra dollars, could other groups be persuaded to put some heat on the Board of Supes.

Ha ha ha ha.... rrrrright...

Fjold
03-01-2006, 11:03 AM
lol...as soon as prop h passed, i bought my remy 870. of course, i'm not gonna give up my gals, either. but, a deputy chief of police that i work with told me (unofficially, of course) that i wouldn't hafta worry b/c none of the sfpd officers he knows will even bother to enforce it.

The problem comes when the police come for another reason, like a nosy neighbor reporting you going into your house with "assault weapons" or that you have a "cache of machine guns" and then they find handguns.

rips31
03-01-2006, 12:42 PM
The problem comes when the police come for another reason, like a nosy neighbor reporting you going into your house with "assault weapons" or that you have a "cache of machine guns" and then they find handguns.
lol...they'll never see it. i xport all my girls in my trunk, so there's no way for some nosy neighbour to see them once i get into my garage. :cool:

shopkeep
03-01-2006, 1:26 PM
It's not like this ban is going to stick around anyways... this is going to be a slam dunk victory for the NRA. There's already established case law that San Francisco specifically cannot enact a handgun ban.

Taz77
03-02-2006, 6:41 AM
I wonder if there is any way to prevent it from going to appeals if CCSF loses.
Could there be any way to get the news out that going to appeals is just going to burn off a lot of money that could go to other things in SF? SF has plenty of programs that want a few extra dollars, could other groups be persuaded to put some heat on the Board of Supes.

That's a pretty good idea... kinda wishful thinking if you ask me, but it really wouldn't hurt to try. Just write up a good letter, and wait until the judge overturns prop H. Then send out the letters before CCSF files for the appeal.

McMadCow
03-02-2006, 10:07 AM
I HIGHLY doubt the city will file an appeal if they lose. No one expects it to stand in court, and many officials have gone on record saying so. They're making their one symbolic stand and they're not going to take it beyond that. It would cost too much money and resources when the city is already severly hurting.

podobo
05-11-2006, 3:14 PM
I know this is an old thread but any news as to whats going on with Prop H?