The right to keep and bear arms is protected by the Second Amendment of the Constitution, and a panel of the California Court of Appeal concluded on Wednesday that the state’s restriction on the sale of semiautomatic weapons to people less than 21 years of age violates that right.
A ruling by a federal judge in San Diego that upheld what Judge Ryan Nelson referred to as a “almost total ban on semiautomatic” rifles for young adults was overturned by a majority of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which was written by Judge Ryan Nelson, who wrote the opinion for a two-to-one majority.
According to what Judge Nelson said in his opinion, “America would not exist if it were not for the bravery of the young adults who fought and died in our revolutionary army.” “Today, we reaffirm that our Constitution still guarantees the right that allowed young people to make their sacrifice: the freedom to keep and bear weapons,”
An argument that young people “were regarded children or ‘infants’ for much of our country’s history without the privileges accorded adults” and were thus unsuitable for “responsible weapon ownership and usage” was rejected by Judge Nelson. The argument was made by a judge from a lower court.
According to a statement released by the state government, “California will continue to take all necessary actions to prevent and decrease gun violence.” “We are unwavering in our dedication to protecting California’s common-sense gun restrictions, which have been shown to save lives and make our communities safer.”
The section of state law that requires people under the age of 21 who are not serving in the armed forces or in law enforcement to get a hunting licence in order to purchase shotguns or rifles was upheld by the court. The court wrote that this provision amounted to “sensible weapon control,” and that it was thus lawful since it met that criteria.
The opinion of the majority was formed by Judge Nelson and Judge Kenneth K. Lee, both of whom were appointed by President Donald J. Trump. The judge who held the dissenting opinion was Judge Sidney H. Stein, a judge on the United States District Court who was appointed by President Bill Clinton and is currently sitting on the Court of Appeals by designation.
The recent increase in gun violence in California prompted Democrats in the state to impose a variety of limitations on gun ownership, one of which was a prohibition on the possession of semiautomatic weapons. The growth in the availability of home-made firearms, often known as “ghost guns,” is a source of worry for the leaders, as does the illicit trafficking of weapons from the states that are nearby.
In California, purchasing a handgun if you are less than 21 years old is against the law. In 2018, after a string of mass shootings, including the massacre that took place at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, lawmakers decided to implement higher age limitations for purchasing long firearms.
The conservative Firearms Policy Coalition, which brought the case and others like it across the country, predicted that Wednesday’s decision would be the beginning of a rollback of gun laws by conservative federal jurists. The Firearms Policy Coalition brought the case and others like it across the country.
Adam Kraut, the vice president of programmes for the organisation, said in a statement that the judgement “confirms that peaceable legal adults cannot be stopped from purchasing weapons and enjoying their rights entrenched in the Second Amendment.”
The Supreme Court is expected to rule soon on a challenge to a law from the early 20th century that restricts who can carry handguns in public in New York. The case in California could be a preview of a more consequential challenge to a state’s right to regulate guns. The case in New York is expected to be decided soon.
