By
Christine Favocci
|
October 21, 2022
|
11:31 am

Judge blocks bill requiring the release of gun owners names and addresses to non-law enforcement entities

Democrats hate the Second Amendment and do all they can to restrict gun rights. However, they've been thwarted in that effort by a recent court ruling.

San Diego Superior Court Judge Katherine Bacal blocked a bill that required the release of gun owners' names and addresses to non-law enforcement entities, the Conservative Brief reported. One of the reasons the judge cited was a recent "massive data breach" that could put owners at risk.

The law, California's Assembly Bill 173, would allow the state to demand private information and share it with researchers at the California Firearm Violence Research Center at UC Davis. This included the buyers' names and addresses as well as dates of birth, when, where, and what firearms they purchased, and more.

Moreover, the law included the ability to share this detailed information with places beyond the "bona fide research institution." California already had problems with privacy rights after the private information for concealed carry permit holders was "inadvertently" shared before being taken down.

"Defendant responds plaintiffs cannot establish irreparable harm because the personal identifying information has already been shared with researchers as recently as November of 2021," Bacal wrote in her opinion Friday. "Yet this does not account for the potential ongoing and future harms that could occur by continuous use of the information," she added.

"Furthermore, and while this motion has been pending, a massive data breach reportedly occurred that leaked personal identifying information from the firearm databases for concealed carry applicants in or about June of 2022," Bacal pointed out. Bill Sack, Firemars Policy coalition Director of Legal Operations, celebrated the decision in a press release.

"The California government has proven time and time again that it can't be trusted with the private personal information of its residents. Today's ruling reinforces what FPC has been arguing all along; that you needn't be forced to open your front door to immoral government intrusion in order to exercise your fundamental rights."

The right to bear arms is constitutionally guaranteed. It's unconscionable to do anything to intimidate those who wish to exercise that right.

Written By:
Christine Favocci

Latest Posts

See All
Don't Wait.
We publish the objective news, period. If you want the facts, then sign up below and join our movement for objective news:
Newsletter
Get news from American Digest in your inbox.
By submitting this form, you are consenting to receive marketing emails from: American Digest, 3000 S. Hulen Street, Ste 124 #1064, Fort Worth, TX, 76109, US, http://americandigest.com. You can revoke your consent to receive emails at any time by using the SafeUnsubscribe® link, found at the bottom of every email. Emails are serviced by Constant Contact.
┬ę 2022 - The American Digest - All Rights Reserved
hello world!