26 states voice opposition to San Francisco home gun storage

[katmandu]

Interesting item in the local paper this morning, found it online too:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/gov ... n-storage/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I couldn't figure out what grounds other states would have to sue, but this explains it:

"Wisconsin Attorney General Brad Schimel (R) said in a statement the ordinance could set a precedent that “could influence policy decisions and court holdings” nationwide, which is why so many states signed on."

[joe817]

All I can say is that I'm thankful I don't live in California. And pleased to see so many Attorney's General submitting their documents SCOTUS for this stupid ordinance.

[airborned]

That is a rediclouse law. I'm glad other states are stepping in to help. How would you even enforce it without a warrant or unconstitutional search.

[baldeagle]

The other states are not suing. They filed an amicus brief. IOW, they chose to provide the court with information they felt was relevant to the case and supported their position on gun control. Interestingly, I cannot find who is actually suing San Francisco. It has to be someone with standing, and I believe that would require that the plaintiff be a San Francisco resident. If I can find out who sued, I'll add to this reply.

BTW, they also banned hollow point ammunition.

Edit: The petitioners are ESPANOLA JACKSON; PAUL COLVIN; THOMAS BOYER; LARRY BARSETTI; DAVID GOLDEN; NOEMI MARGARET ROBINSON; NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA, INC.; SAN FRANCISCO VETERAN POLICE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION. The Amicus Brief was filed by The States of Nebraska, Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming. They are citing Heller and claiming there is no material difference between the San Francisco ordinance and the Washington, D.C. ordinance that was struck down in Heller.

[RogueUSMC]

“Common sense dictates that in high stress, emergency situations, the ease and speed with which a person can utilize one of these mechanisms to unlock a safe drastically decreases,” the document reads. “It is common to fumble with keys while trying to hurriedly unlock a door, to forget a series of numbers when under pressure, or to struggle with hand-eye coordination when subjected to stressors.”

Is this supposed to be a selling point?