SAF, CALGUNS FOUNDATION CHALLENGES CALIFORNIA HANDGUN BAN SCHEME
The Second Amendment Foundation, The Calguns Foundation and four California residents today filed a lawsuit challenging a California state law and regulatory scheme that arbitrarily bans handguns based on a roster of "certified" handguns approved by the State. This case parallels a similar case filed in Washington, DC, Hanson v. District of Columbia.
California uses this list despite a ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court last summer that protects handguns that ordinary people traditionally use for self-defense, and a recent ruling by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals that the Second Amendment applies to state and local governments. The California scheme will eventually ban the purchase of almost all new handguns.
Your immediate help is needed to protect your Second Amendment Rights.
SAF needs your most generous donations today to fight the state of California. The foundation is helping to fund our legal efforts with a matching grant to double every dollar you donate up to $75,000.
Select Here to Contribute Now!
https://secure.conservativedonations.com/ccrkba/?a=2344
Attorney Alan Gura, representing the plaintiffs in this case, noted that California "tells Ivan Peña that his rights have an expiration date based on payment of a government fee. Americans are not limited to a government list of approved books, or approved religions," he said. "A handgun protected by the Second Amendment does not need to appear on any government-approved list and cannot be banned because a manufacturer does not pay a special annual fee."
"The Para Ordnance P-13 was once approved for sale in California," Peña noted, "but now that a manufacturer didn't pay a yearly fee, California claims the gun I want to own has somehow become 'unsafe'."
"The Glock-21 is the handgun I would choose for home defense, but California has decided the version I need is unacceptable. I was born without a right arm below my elbow and therefore the new ambidextrous version of the Glock-21 is the safest one for me. The identical model designed for right hand use is available in California, but I can't use it," said plaintiff Roy Vargas.
Added SAF founder Alan Gottlieb, "The Supreme Court's decision is crystal clear: Handguns that are used by people for self-defense and other lawful purposes cannot be banned, whether the State likes it or not. California needs to accept the Second Amendment reality."
Co-counsel Jason Davis remarked, "The California Handgun Roster has always been about making the possession of handguns for self defense more difficult by imposing arbitrary and unconstitutional restrictions that limit choice and increase the cost of exercising a fundamental right."
Joining plaintiffs Peña and Vargas are Doña Croston and Brett Thomas. Doña Croston's handgun would be allowed if it were black, green, or brown, but her bi-tone version is supposedly 'unsafe' merely based on color. "I didn't realize that my constitutional rights depended on color. What is it about two colors that makes the gun I want to purchase 'unsafe'?"
Brett Thomas seeks to own the same model of handgun that the Supreme Court ordered District of Columbia officials to register for Dick Heller. However, that particular model is no longer manufactured, and its maker is no longer available to process the handgun's certification through the bureaucracy.
"There is only one model of handgun that the Supreme Court has explicitly ruled is protected by the Second Amendment and yet California will not allow me to purchase that gun," said Mr. Thomas.
"The so-called 'safe' gun list is just another gun-grabbing gimmick," said co-counsel Donald Kilmer. "California can't get around the Second Amendment, as incorporated, by declaring most normal guns 'unsafe,' and gradually shrinking the number of so-called 'safe' guns to zero."
SAF can't fund this new legal suit or continue those in progress without your financial help and involvement.
Our lawsuits cost an estimated $240,000 each and the five other lawsuits we have going on could cost well over an additional $650,000 alone!
I must have support from loyal SAF Supporters like you to go-ahead with our attorney, Alan Gura, who won the Supreme Court case that overturned the Washington. D.C. gun ban.
And I promise you, we won't pay any attorney one cent more than we have to. I will not allow any lawyer to get rich off the money you contribute. This case will protect gun rights in all 50 states.
Your immediate tax-deductible gift of $500, $100, $50, $25 or whatever you can afford, will be necessary to fund our legal suit in defense of your right to own and use a gun for self-defense.
SAF needs your most generous donations today to fight the state of California. The foundation is helping to fund our legal efforts with a matching grant to double every dollar you donate up to $75,000.
Select Here to Contribute Now!
https://secure.conservativedonations.com/ccrkba/?a=2344
Get more facts on the semi-automatic firearms issue at the CCRKBA website
www.ccrkba.org
Please let me know your decision right away. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Alan Gottlieb
Chairman
Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms
![[sad]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/004.gif "Sad [sad]")
![[rofl]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/013.gif "ROFL [rofl]")
and CA is forced to come up with a list of specific, definable parameters that a gun has to meet, period, our list then opens up so becka can get her S&W11 in whatever form she wants it, etc. It also starts to hone in on the infernal AG regs. No longer will she be able to have wishy washy definitions of what something can be to meet the requirement. She will have to sit down, write the requirements down in a way that it is clear if something meets the definition or not. 
