My question involves civil rights in the State of California:
If a client falls under the lifetime firearms ban does he have any means to sue the government because he cannot secure his assets or capital due to the fact that his second amendment right is null and void?
I have a client who received a 5250 over ten years ago. He recently attempted to purchase a firearm legally through a firearms dealer in California and the dealer was told by the DOJ to not sell him the weapon.
My client feel like his Constitutional contract with the government is simply null and void because the government is failing to provide him with the means for securing his property, land, and livelihood.
After a citizen receives a 5250 are their 2nd Amendment Rights null and void in addition to their means to secure capital and their assets?
I find it difficult to believe that a lifetime firearm ban is Constitutional? Is it? and what is the legal reasoning behind this? (could you get a lifetime ban on the 1st amendment?) Do the 5250 laws supersede the 2nd Amendment?
What court would my client even sue in? I'm not well versed in these manners. I was surprised that the government could create a lifetime ban for someone being able to own / possess a firearm, because after that occurs what does the government say you do as a means to protect your assets capital livelihood etc? What does that say about the validity of the 2nd amendment when the DOJ bans you from owning firearms for you entire life?
My client is basically asking me to sue the government because he feels that if he can't own a gun then the government isn't giving him the same rights according to the US Constitution that everyone else has. He is asking me to recover all of the taxes he had paid to the government because he says the Constitution does not give him the right to bear arms anymore...
Is the Constitution null and void because it fails to provide my client with his second amendment rights? What else would you call a lifetime ban on firearms?