What are the boundaries of municipal ordinances

[rdtompki]

There are counties and cities in CA that have passed ordinances imposing certain restrictions on firearm owners. What prohibits a municipality from banning, for example, semi-auto rifles, etc., within their jurisdiction?

[Hoooper]

In California, preemption.

[unusedusername]

Preemption supposedly prohibits the municipalities and counties in the state of California from passing any laws regarding firearms.

Effectively, the state says "We own all the law in this area, you locals can't pass any".

The problem is that the court system has been unwilling to enforce this. San Francisco has an ordinance prohibiting a specific brand of ammunition. Sunnyvale has a prohibition of possession of some magazines, and LA has a similar law.

In cases challenging this, the state court has been unwilling to enforce the state preemption. We shall see how this goes down in the future.

The California court system appears to either be so corrupt or hate firearms so much that they are willing to ignore state law in their rulings.

[Hoooper]

Preemption generally applies only to areas that the state already regulates. So municipalities should under that provision be able to regulate ammunition (other issues like 2a violations aside) since the state does not, but they shouldn't be allowed to regulate "assault weapons" because the state does regulate that already. Magazine bans it would appear should be struck down as the state already regulates magazines, we will see if the courts eventually are honest with themselves about that.

This is the reason though that sf has not passed it's own "assault weapons" ban and it's the reason that sf prop h was thrown out.

[bobbodaggit]

Preemption generally applies only to areas that the state already regulates. So municipalities should under that provision be able to regulate ammunition (other issues like 2a violations aside) since the state does not, but they shouldn't be allowed to regulate "assault weapons" because the state does regulate that already. Magazine bans it would appear should be struck down as the state already regulates magazines, we will see if the courts eventually are honest with themselves about that.

This is the reason though that sf has not passed it's own "assault weapons" ban and it's the reason that sf prop h was thrown out.

True

[Ripon83]

Opposite? And what of the opposite? What if a muni, school district, county adopts rules that enable its citizens to enjoy their rights pre emptied by state regulations ?

[glockman19]

Opposite? And what of the opposite? What if a muni, school district, county adopts rules that enable its citizens to enjoy their rights pre emptied by state regulations ?

It would be Chaos, and that's why there is preemption. Issues only arise when preemption is ignored.

Municipal Ordinances END at the municipal border. I could have a standard capacity magazine and stand just beyond the LA border with a middle finger salute and the LAPD could do NOTHING. It's out of their jurisdiction.

[aphrozeus]

It would be Chaos, and that's why there is preemption. Issues only arise when preemption is ignored.

Municipal Ordinances END at the municipal border. I could have a standard capacity magazine and stand just beyond the LA border with a middle finger salute and the LAPD could do NOTHING. It's out of their jurisdiction.

Although not recommended, because it's the LAPD. I doubt they know the exact border well enough to not make your day very bad.

[Hoooper]

Opposite? And what of the opposite? What if a muni, school district, county adopts rules that enable its citizens to enjoy their rights pre emptied by state regulations ?

If there is a CA state law and you are within the state, the law applies to you. A municipality could pass a law to "repeal" the AW ban (ignoring the potential preemption issue), but you could still be arrested and convicted if arrested in that municipalities region because as long as you are within the state's borders you are subject to the state's laws. This is the same as laws that are on the federal books but states ignore. If the DEA wanted to they could run around arresting all the people smoking weed in town regardless of their medical card status.