District court judge strikes down part of California's Unsafe Handgun Act

Welcome to the Precious Metals Bug Forums

Welcome to the PMBug forums - a watering hole for folks interested in gold, silver, precious metals, sound money, investing, market and economic news, central bank monetary policies, politics and more. You can visit the forum page to see the list of forum nodes (categories/rooms) for topics.

Please have a look around and if you like what you see, please consider registering an account and joining the discussions. When you register an account and log in, you may enjoy additional benefits including no ads, market data/charts, access to trade/barter with the community and much more. Registering an account is free - you have nothing to lose!


Your Host
Reaction score
A federal judge in California has issued an order granting a preliminary injunction against enforcement of sections of the state’s “Unsafe Handgun Act” (UHA), while denying a preliminary injunction request against other sections of the law, in a Second Amendment Foundation case.
The case, originally filed in late 2020, challenges the requirements of California’s UHA, which includes a codified “roster” of acceptable handguns. The roster limits handgun sales to those models that satisfy numerous testing and safety feature requirements, such as a “chamber loaded indicator” (CLI) and “magazine disconnect mechanism” (MDM) and microstamping, which plaintiffs say are not required in 47 other states. The requirements have essentially prevented the sale of modern up-to-date handguns, as no new models have been added to the roster’s approved list for more than a decade. Meanwhile, the limited number of handguns now on the list continues to shrink because of the testing and safety feature requirements.

Judge Sabraw notes in his 30-page ruling that “Plaintiffs have shown likely success on their claim that the UHA’s CLI, MDM and microstamping requirements violate their Second Amendment rights.”

Top Bottom