BREAKING: Judge issues ruling on California law requiring safety features for handguns

Sign up for DML's newsletter

If you want to see DML NEWS APP articles without ads, click here.

As the most reliable and balanced news aggregation service on the internet, DML News App offers the following information published by REUTERS.COM:

March 20 (Reuters) – A federal judge on Monday blocked California from enforcing a state law requiring new semiautomatic handguns to have certain safety features, finding it violates the right to bear arms under the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

The ruling by U.S. District Judge Cormac Carney in Santa Anna, California is the latest in a line of decisions striking down state gun laws following a U.S. Supreme Court ruling last year expanding gun rights. The judge said it would not take effect for 14 days to give the state a chance to appeal.

The California Rifle & Pistol Association and four individuals sued the state last year to challenge the law. The association hailed the ruling while the office of California Attorney General Rob Bonta did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Stephen Gutowski, founder of, shared the following details and commentary in a series of Twitter posts:

California can’t ban residents from buying modern handguns.

“Californians have the constitutional right to acquire and use state-of-the-art handguns to protect themselves. They should not be forced to settle for decade-old models of handguns to ensure that they remain safe inside or outside the home.”

Federal District Judge Cormac J. Carney, a George W. Bush appointee, ruled California’s Unsafe Handgun Act is unconstitutional. His preliminary injunction goes into effect in 2 weeks. California is likely to appeal, though the AG hasn’t commented.

In 2001, California required all new pistol models to include a loaded chamber indicator and magazine disconnect safety. That reduced the number of handguns available to civilians (cops are exempted from the “unsafe” handgun roster).

In 2013, California began requiring all new pistol models to also have “microstamping” to help trace spent casings. However, no gun anywhere in the world has ever had the technology. So, all pistols introduced after 2013 have been effectively banned there.

Judge Carney ruled the law implicates Second Amendment rights and doesn’t fit in the historical tradition of gun regulation, as required under the Bruen standard. So, it’s unconstitutional.

“[The right to keep and bear arms] is so fundamental that to regulate conduct covered by the Second Amendment’s plain text, the government must show more than that the regulation promotes an important interest like reducing accidental discharges or solving crime,” Carney wrote.

You read a lot more about the ruling, including the reaction from the plaintiffs, in the full piece:

This ruling is another against California’s gun laws. It’s one of the first post-Bruen cases to be decided in the state. It is a bad sign for the rest of the state’s aggressive restrictions.

But it doesn’t go into effect for 2 weeks and is likely to get appealed and stayed.

So, California will still be able to enforce the law in the short term. And a stay would give them the ability to keep enforcing it as an appeal is processed, which could take many more months. The relief here for gun-rights advocates won’t be instant.

To get more information about this article, please visit REUTERS.COM.

The Dennis Michael Lynch Podcast is available below. Never miss an episode. Subscribe to the show by downloading The DML News App or go to Apple Podcasts.


  1. Have they ever considered trying to prosecute violent criminals? Keep them in jail and not let them out on bail if there’s any risk? About time we start dealing with the actual problem, repeat offenders commit, so many violent crimes.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here