Weep for the Ammosexuals

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has stayed a lower court ruling by a GW Bush appointed judge, and will allow California's restrictions on gun carriage to stand.

This is good, and hopefully, we will see more of this: 

A federal appeals court on Saturday allowed California’s ban on the carrying of firearms in most public places to take effect in 2024, halting a lower court judge’s ruling that had blocked enforcement of the law.

The state law, Senate Bill 2, sets several restrictions on gun ownership, and Gov. Gavin Newsom approved it in September. But Judge Cormac Carney of the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California blocked enforcement of the law in December, saying that the ban on guns in most public places would unconstitutionally “deprive” citizens of their right to bear arms.

Judge Carney wrote in his ruling to grant an injunction that the ban “is sweeping, repugnant to the Second Amendment, and openly defiant of the Supreme Court.”

Gee, does Carney sound like a deranged partisan hack to you?  He does to me.

But the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals paused the injunction, allowing the law to go into effect on Monday while the court takes more time to decide on the constitutionality of the law.

So the judge has not been overturned, but the law will be allowed to take effect, but it seems likely that they the appeals court will rule in favor of the law.

………

Along with banning the carrying of guns in most public places, the law sets the minimum age for obtaining a gun license at 21 and adds more requirements for gun safety training before receiving a new license.

The public places covered by the law are divided into 26 categories with various locations, including playgrounds, public transportation, stadiums, amusement parks and museums. The law also prohibits people from carrying firearms on the grounds of private businesses unless there is clear signage indicating that they are allowed.

That last bit is a nice touch. It created the presumption that guns are not allowed on private property, and it requires merchants who want their spaces to be a free fire zone to make this clear to the public. Sweet.

Here is hoping that the appellate court ends up overturning the judge, and that the Supreme Court decides not to hear the case.