A ruling by California’s 4th District Court of Appeal, that the state’s ban on possession of an “AK series” semi-automatic rifle does not run afoul of the Second Amendment, will not attract support for a challenge, Gun Rights Examiner learned yesterday in consultation with potential backers. Defendant/ Appellant William Martin Zondorak has been confirmed as the same individual listed on the HomeFacts Offender Detail website with the notation “Offense/Statute: Possess or control obscene matter depicting minor in sexual conduct.”
That information was elaborated in Zondorak’s entry on California’s “Megan’s Law” website, which references “Offense Code 311.11(a).” The code says in part:
311.11. (a) Every person who knowingly possesses or controls any matter, representation of information, data, or image … knowing that the matter depicts a person under the age of 18 years personally engaging in or simulating sexual conduct … is guilty of a felony…
That his becoming a prohibited person did not factor into Zondorak’s gun conviction was a matter of timing. What is clear is that such a case would be difficult enough to advance were the central figure a demonstrable law-abiding model of virtue.
The Zondorak ruling represents a damaging break for right to keep and bear arms advocates, because standing on its own, the court’s reasoning seems vulnerable, and many of the factors that would ultimately need to be weighed in higher courts present themselves in the opinion. As with the Miller decision that the court referenced, this is once again a case where having a criminal figure at the center has resulted in a legal setback, in this case because a higher appeal that might overturn it is now so inconceivable.
While the sex offense charge was nowhere presented as a factor in Zondorak’s gun case, it is reasonable to assume California Attorney General Kamala Harris, whose Department of Justice administers the Meagan’s Law website, and the judges hearing the case, were well aware of it, and thus secure in assuming that what the state argued and the court ruled would not lend itself to challenge. That ruling will now stand in California until such time as the “assault weapon” issue is finally brought before the United States Supreme Court, and that’s assuming they first agree to hear such a case and then decide in favor of gun rights.
If you’re a regular Gun Rights Examiner reader and believe it provides news and perspectives you won’t find in the mainstream press, please subscribe to this column and help spread the word by sharing links, promoting it on social media like Facebook (Dan) and Twitter (@dcodrea), and telling your like-minded friends about it. And for more commentary, be sure to visit “The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance.”
The antis are coming at us from all angles. There’s too much for one person to even keep up with, let alone effectively respond to. The latest GUNS Magazine “Rights Watch” column is online, and you can read it before the magazine hits the stands. Click here to read “They’ve Got Us Surrounded!”