I'm wondering if the NRA will lead the legal challenges to this absurdity.
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - Voters approved ballot measures to ban
handguns in San Francisco and urge the city's public high schools
and college campuses to keep out military recruiters.
The gun ban prohibits the manufacture and sale of all firearms
and ammunition in the city, and makes it illegal for residents to
keep handguns in their homes or businesses.
Only two other major U.S. cities - Washington and Chicago - have
implemented such sweeping handgun bans.
With all precincts reporting early Wednesday, 58 percent of
voters backed the proposed gun ban while 42 percent opposed it.
Although law enforcement, security guards and others who require
weapons for work are exempt from the measure, current handgun
owners would have to surrender their firearms by April.
A coalition led by the National Rifle Association has said it
plans to challenge the initiative in court, arguing that cities do
not have the authority to regulate firearms under California law.
The military recruitment initiative won with 60 percent in favor
and 40 percent against.
The measure, dubbed ``College Not Combat,'' opposes the presence
of military recruiters at public high schools and colleges.
However, it would not ban the armed forces from seeking enlistees
at city campuses, since that would put schools at risk of losing
federal funding.
It encourages city officials and university administrators to
exclude recruiters and create scholarships and training programs
that would reduce the military's appeal to young adults.
``We now have the moral weight of the city behind us, and it's
definitely a valuable asset to have in our corner,'' said Bob
Matthews, an activist for the proposition.
I'd expect nothing left from the Union of Soviet Socialist Butt Pirates
__________________
Obamanfreude - 1. taking pleasure from the misfortunes of an Obama supporter as he or she is adversely affected by the policies of their Dear Leader.
Doesn't look good for SF hand gun owners. Seems the supreme court isn't even willing to look at the case, at least in the 1980's. Maybe times have changed:
I'd be surprised if this one doesn't get to the supreme court based upon Walton'sinterpretation of the 2nd amendment.
Quote:
Washington, D.C.
[ul][*]The City Council enacted legislation that completely banned the sale and possession of handguns in the city, and the ban remains active today.[*]A lawsuit brought by the NRA challenging the constitutionality of the DC handgun ban was dismissed on January 15, 2004 by U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton, who ruled the ban constitutional.[*]According to Judge Walton: "The Court must conclude that the Second Amendment doesn't confer an individual right to possess firearms. Rather, the Amendments objective is to ensure the vitality of state militias."
Just wait until their crime rate doubles , and if England and Australia are any example it should come very swiftly . Good luck to them trying to get recruiters out of the colleges and high schools , but they won't win .
__________________
Kevin Haendiges
NAHC Life Member
NRA Member
Wildlife Forever Member
GOA Member
Buckmasters Member
http://hunting-indiana.com
ORIGINAL: ranwin33
Leave it to California. Always going waaaay tooo left.
Exactly... [:@]
Now you all just watch. Here it is Nov 9th.... Probably by the end of the year, or heck at worst, the end of this month - San Francisco's crime rate will soar and be just like England's and Australia's did. Remember that?
San Francisco bans handguns
