Gun Owners, 2A Groups Challenge California ‘Assault Weapon’ Ban

08/16/19 6:00 AM | by

Gun Owners, 2A Groups Challenge California 'Assault Weapon' Ban

AR-15 with Magpul D60 mag and 30 round PMAGs

California has had a ban on many otherwise ordinary semi-autos since 1989 (Photo: Chris Eger/

Three gun owners allied with pro-gun groups filed a federal lawsuit on Thursday against California officials challenging the state’s “assault weapon” ban. The gun owners — James Miller, Patrick Russ, and Ryan Peterson — argue that the state’s longstanding prohibition on many commonly-owned semi-automatic firearms violates the Second Amendment.

The lawsuit names California Attorney General Xavier Becerra and others as defendants and is supported by the Firearms Policy Coalition, Firearms Policy Foundation, Second Amendment Foundation, the California Gun Rights Foundation and San Diego County Gun Owners, the latter of which has signed on as a co-plaintiff.

“The government cannot ban the constitutionally-protected firearms at issue in this case,” said attorney George M. Lee, representing the gun owners. “We look forward to proving that the State’s statutes, policies, and practices at issue, in this case, are both unconstitutional and irrational.”

The 19-page complaint argues that the firearms banned by the current law are “exactly the sorts of lawful weapons in common use that law-abiding people possess at home for lawful purposes and exactly what they would bring to service in militia duty should such cause be necessary.” Going on to hold that the Second Amendment is not a second-class right, the filing argues the increasing layers of bans established in California since the state first moved to outlaw certain guns in 1989 continue to step on that right with increasingly heavy boots.

While the three gun owners in the case admit they own AR-15-style firearms, their guns have been retrofitted to have fixed magazines as mandated by state law to be compliant– unlike the same rifles ordinarily found in virtually every other state that has no such requirement. This requirement, outlines the filing, is incompatible with a ruling issued by a federal court in March that found the state’s prohibition on the possession of large-capacity magazines was unconstitutional.

“This is a straight-forward case to protect our clients’ constitutional rights and property,” said John Dillon, an attorney for the gun owners. “The State of California’s ban on these firearms will fail constitutional scrutiny for the same reasons that its ban on firearm magazines did.”

Latest Reviews

  • Winchester Snow Goose

    Winchester Hits Hard with Xpert Snow Goose Ammo

    Modern ammunition manufacturers are recognizing the demand for specialty rounds among dedicated hunters -- enter Winchester’s Snow Goose.

    Read Now
  • Beretta A400

    Beretta A400 Xtreme Plus Ready for the Worst of Waterfowling

    While the jury remains out on measuring recoil in the duck blind, the one certainty is that the new iteration...

    Read Now
  • Asfaleia

    Asfaleia Creates Designer Concealed Carry, Bulletproof Tote

    A new concealed carry bag company is on the rise, introducing a more stylish approach to the concealed carry conundrum.

    Read Now
  • The Sig P365 SAS - First 100 Rounds and Initial Thoughts

    At first look, the Sig Anti Snag (SAS) model has many exciting features, including new sights in the familiar small...

    Read Now