Miller v. Bonta 9th Ckt "assault weapons": Held for Duncan result 1-26-24

[jcwatchdog]

I can't wait to see how the DOJ says that they can not provide that information when it is all clearly gathered during DROS.
Somehow it's not going to be "ascertainable"...

[AbrahamBurden]

But they’re in kind of a catch 22. If they say the data is not obtainable, then how can the state represent the rifles as not very common, which is part of their argument. They want to claim these as not in common use.

If they make this claim, and make a claim that these guns are not in common use, but they have no data one way or another, how do they arrive at the conclusion that the rifles are not in common use?

Never expect those to write the rules to play by them.

If anything I'd imagine that they'd argue that just gathering statistics on "the total number of rifles, the total number of shotguns" is too vague regarding the question of assault weapons, without a deeper dive into the stats in question, which they intentionally won't do. Rifles can mean anything from fudd guns like Marlin Model 60s to military pattern ones in question like WASRs and Aero Precision ARs; likewise, shotguns can run anywhere from Beretta Silver Pigeons to Molot Vepr-12s and Benelii M4s.

I imagine DOJ will take the slanted view that most long guns sold are ultra fudd guns and therefore the "assault weapons" are not in common use. A detailed analysis of what guns could easily be configured as "assault weapons" in California would be a very labor-intensive and contentious review of many models, as DROS doesn't collect those stats on the point of sale, unless the argument of just "anything self-loading and centerfire" comes into play.

Moreover, the whole standard of "common use" itself is also rather a Catch-22 to me when a huge barrier for why stuff like ARs (or their select-fire counterparts, indeed) is NOT in common-use is precisely due to their own laws. In effect:

"The firearms you want are not in common use because we have laws making their acquisition very onerous. Therefore, because said firearms are not in common use, we are therefore justified legally in passing even MORE laws making their acquisition EVEN MORE onerous in the grand name of public safety. (Forget how we keep people with said firearms around for OUR personal safety on call at all times.)"

These people are absolute scum and it's frankly a travesty that they strut about collecting taxpayer money and issuing diktats that drive this state further into the ground every week.

[ar15barrels]

A detailed analysis of what guns could easily be configured as "assault weapons" in California would be a very labor-intensive and contentious review of many models, as DROS doesn't collect those stats on the point of sale,

Make and model is enough.
Take the top 100 make/model in semi-auto centerfire rifles and it would be easy to sort them by "could be configured as AW" vs "not easily configured as AW".
The top 100 models will cover the vast VOLUME of centerfire rifles sold as once you get to the 101'th position, the volume is getting very small.
Given a proper dataset to work with, this is a VERY simple analysis in Excel.

[jcwatchdog]

Make and model is enough.
Take the top 100 make/model in semi-auto centerfire rifles and it would be easy to sort them by "could be configured as AW" vs "not easily configured as AW".
The top 100 models will cover the vast VOLUME of centerfire rifles sold as once you get to the 101'th position, the volume is getting very small.
Given a proper dataset to work with, this is a VERY simple analysis in Excel.

The thing is if it’s a center fire semi automatic with detachable mag, if the caliber is larger than .22lr, then pretty much every rifle can be configured very easily as an AW. How easy is it to add a flash hider for any rifle that has a threaded barrel, or if they don’t have a threaded barrel, just stick a simple forward grip on it. I don’t think it’s anywhere near hard to convert any center fire mag fed rifle to an AW considering their definitions. My ruger mini14 with no threaded barrel can easily be dropped in a chassis with a folding stock and there you go. It’s more about what money you’re willing to spend to add something to your gun, not so much difficulty doing it. Even with a simple SKS which seems harder to convert, it’s really not. Remove the fixed mag and then attach one of those SKS mags that I think promag makes? It’s an AW for under $20 spent.

They should provide a list of all rifles:

Center fire
Semi automatic
Caliber larger than .22lr

I’m sure they must have a filter in the dros or drop it all into excel and filter it.

[NATO762]

IANAL, but I was struck by the irony of a quoted precedent from 1816 (lines 11-13 on p.7 of the

"At a time like this, scorching irony, not convincing argument, is needed."

-Frederick Douglass

Silence Dogood, what an awesome nugget you have discovered. I had to double check that this was truly from the defendant's response! I hope the Miller team turns this around on them to full effect. That alone would be worth the price of admission. I'm sure Benitez will also pick up on it.

Make and model is enough.
Take the top 100 make/model in semi-auto centerfire rifles and it would be easy to sort them by "could be configured as AW" vs "not easily configured as AW".
The top 100 models will cover the vast VOLUME of centerfire rifles sold as once you get to the 101'th position, the volume is getting very small.
Given a proper dataset to work with, this is a VERY simple analysis in Excel.

Another action to follow closely. Dumping the raw stats Benitez is requesting should take no more than 5-10min for a semi-competent IT professional. He's only asking for totals and the most basic split. There is no way they can get out of providing the total number of firearms sold in the state with background checks for 2020 and 2021.

[CandG]

He's only asking for totals and the most basic split. There is no way they can get out of providing the total number of firearms sold in the state with background checks for 2020 and 2021.

At least, not without sounding totally incompetent. It will be hard for them to argue that Assault Weapon registration is a public safety necessity, while at the same time also claiming that they have no idea how to manage or use a registration database.

[ar15barrels]

They should provide a list of all rifles:

Center fire
Semi automatic
Caliber larger than .22lr

Caliber larger than 22lr does not matter.
Centerfire is all that matters.
A 17 remington or 204 ruger are both centerfire cartridges smaller than 22lr that would still be assault weapons.
Simply filtering out guns chambered in 22lr, 22mag, 17hmr, 17mkII, 17wsm and any other rimfires that are currently made that I am not thinking about will do.
All the remaining ones will be centerfire.

[everyday_hero]

[everyday_hero]

Correction 2019. Seems like forever and a half ago.

[CandG]

Correction 2019. Seems like forever and a half ago.

Correction, 1990.

It's gotten progressively worse since then, but that's when the AWCA began.

[macentyre]

[CandG]

Off-topic for this thread, but I'll try to answer your questions.

So I just saw that they want us to pay the gov $800 a year for liability insurance and if you don’t, you are ineligible to own any firearm?

"They" want zero guns for anyone that isn't SWAT or military, period. The UK gun control model is their end game (except, really, there is no end game - see recent UK knife ban laws for reference). So, to them, this would just be a "logical" step in that direction.

Who in their right mind will do these things?

Nobody.

Do you guys think this will become reality?

No, it's just political posturing. We see asinine new bills every session (this is nothing new), authored by extremist democrats who were voted in by overwhelmingly-democrat districts, and who have no actual expectation that it will go anywhere. They're just trying to send a message to their constituents that they're "trying to do something", to improve their chances for re-election. It's akin to the $4k/month UBI bills that we keep seeing - largely, nobody on either side of the aisle wants it except for a small handful.

What are we going to do at that point?

Not worth wasting your time thinking about that, it isn't going to happen. And even if it did happen, the most effect it will have, is flipping congress red at midterms. It would be career suicide for dems to actually pass such a thing, which is why they made the bill so extreme (and blatantly unconstitutional) that it stands no chance of actually going anywhere. They might as well have added to the bill that nobody would be eligible for gun ownership unless you get an abortion and have gender reassignment surgery, because it wouldn't change its likelihood of passing. And then when it inevitably fails, they can blame republicans for blocking "common-sense gun safety legislation". It's a win-win for them.

It's page 1 of the democrat playbook - when you want to look like you're doing something, without actually doing anything, make your bill so extreme that nobody with more than 2 brain cells would vote for it.

[steelrain82]

I think the states continual overreach, may have shot themselves in the dick. By forcing us to register rifles, handgun style, they forced themselves into a situation which will show how many possible AR and other "assault rifle" type fire arms are in common use. They can't deny the data because it will show their incompetence. They know they are ****ed this round and are hoping the feds hit back with their version of an AWB. Data isn't always your friend.

[CandG]

I think the states continual overreach, may have shot themselves in the dick. By forcing us to register rifles, handgun style, they forced themselves into a situation which will show how many possible AR and other "assault rifle" type fire arms are in common use. They can't deny the data because it will show their incompetence. They know they are ****ed this round and are hoping the feds hit back with their version of an AWB. Data isn't always your friend.

Hope so. It wouldn't be the first time. Freedom Week likely never would have happened if Gavin just left the existing magazine acquisition ban alone, instead of pushing his Prop 63.

[Silence Dogood]

Shhhhishhhhh. Let them push the pendulum too far.

It’d be nice to get an excuse for SCOTUS to correctly rule as unconstitutional the restrictions codified in the NFA, GCA, and FOPA.

EDIT to add: No, that’d be hell in the interim but the end result of a stronger 2A would be nice.