linky



   In the decision released this morning, Federal Eastern District of California Senior Judge Anthony W. Ishii, appointed to the bench by President Bill Clinton, found that “the 10-day waiting periods of Penal Code [sections 26815(a) and 27540(a)] violate the Second Amendment” as applied to members of certain classifications, like Silvester and Combs, and “burdens the Second Amendment rights of the Plaintiffs.”

   “This is a great win for Second Amendment civil rights and common sense,” said Jeff Silvester, the named individual plaintiff. “I couldn’t be happier with how this case turned out.”

   Under the court order, the California Department of Justice (DOJ) must change its systems to accommodate the unobstructed release of guns to gun buyers who pass a background check and possess a California license to carry a handgun, or who hold a “Certificate of Eligibility” issued by the DOJ and already possess at least one firearm known to the state.

Meanwhile in NY, the wait time to legally obtain your first handgun ranges from several months to over a year.

And subsequent handguns can be many months. It's not a law on the books though...just a procedural delay...which is a defacto waiting period.

NYC on the other hand DOES have a waiting period...90 day wait between handgun or long gun purchases.

yea funny the judge talked about that also..



   First, in terms of relevant historical understandings, Defendant has not established that waiting period laws were understood to be outside the protections of the Second Amendment. Defendant has cited no statutes or regulations around 1791or 1868 that imposed waiting periods between the time of purchase and the time of delivery. Nor has Defendant cited historical materials or books that discuss waiting periods or attitudes towards waiting periods between 1791and 1868. There is no evidence to suggest that waiting periods imposed by the government would have been accepted and understood to be permissible under the Second Amendment. Cf.Peruta, 742 F.3d at1153-66.Second, in terms of Heller?s longstanding presumptively lawful regulations, Defendant has not established that the 10-day waiting period is a presumptively lawful longstanding regulatory measure that imposes a condition and qualification on the commercial sale of a firearm.

   …

   Moreover, Defendant has not established that the waiting period law is sufficiently “longstanding” to be entitled to a presumption of lawfulness. Included in the concept of a “longstanding and presumptively lawful regulation” is that the regulation has long been accepted and is rooted in history. See N.R.A., 700 F.3d at 196; United States v. Rene E., 583 F.3d 8, 12 (1st Cir. 2008). It is true that California has had some form of a waiting period since 1923. However, as described above, the Court is aware of no waiting period laws in any states during the time periods around 1791 and 1868. Consistent with these historical periods, currently only ten states impose a waiting period between the time of purchase and the time of delivery of a firearm. Waiting period laws did not exist near the time of adoption of the Second and Fourteenth Amendments, and they are not common now. That one state may have had some form of regulation for a significant period of time is insufficient for the Court to conclude that the law has been so generally accepted that it is presumptively lawful. Cf.N.R.A., 700 F.3d at 196 (“. . . a longstanding measure that harmonizes with the history and tradition of arms regulation in this country would not threaten the core of the Second Amendment guarantee.”).Further, the 10-day waiting period at issue was not imposed until 1996, and it was not until 1975 that California began to impose a waiting period that extended to double digits (15 days). Prior to 1975, the waiting period was 5 days. The waiting period that was in effect the longest in California was the 1-day waiting period between 1923 and 1955for handguns, and there is an indication that the law was not applied to all transactions. Imposition of waiting periods beyond a “single digit” period is a recent development.

   Cf.Church of the Am. KKK v. City of Gary, 334 F.3d 676, 682-83(7th Cir. 2003)(noting that 30-day advance notice requirement to obtain a permit was reasonable under the circumstances of one case, but that a 45-day advance notice requirement was a substantially longer period and not reasonable). Finally, the waiting period at issue applies to all firearms. Prior to 1991, the waiting period applied only to handguns. Although the 1996 waiting period is shorter in duration than the 15-day period imposed in 1975, the 1996/1991waiting period is wider in scope. Applying a waiting period to all firearms is a recent development. In essence, Defendant has simply pointed to the fact that California has had some form of waiting period since 1923. That is not enough.

   The 10-day waiting period burdens the Second Amendment rights of the Plaintiffs.

Wow.  Never thought I'd be jealous of my brother in San Diego.

Good argument.  Seems like "common sense" to me.

Now if I could just get my new 45 out of handgun jail...

Friend of mine (21) just got her pistol permit in Wayne county in 3 months.  That's pretty damn quick.  Mine was 2 months back in 2003 in the same county.

Was told 6-12 months in st law....

I'll forget about it and it'll be a nice little surprise some day.

Edit: for pistol permit that is.

So they'll reduce it to three business days starting the next business day after the 4473 is filled out
So If you biught a gun Saturday it would be Thursday before you could pick it up.
Once a tyrant has control over your liberties, it's easier to snatch the fis out of an alligators mount than get anything away from them.  

That's just ridiculous
It shouldn't take almost a year to buy the basic tools for a three gun match

As if any guns allowed in NYC would be suitable for a 3 gun match anyway (or for self defense). Not to mention the 5 round long gun mag capacity in NYC.