“I don’t believe any court could have enforced such a law. Romney fixed it so that it could be enforced and even had the NRA compromise to get it done.”
I wouldn’t call that a “fix” unless you mean fixed it for the gun grabbers.
That's exactly what I meant, of course.
One need only ask, "Why did the anti-gunners support the bill?" I don't see the anti-gunners helping to ease the burden on law-abiding citizens here in Kalifornia. The only thing in that bill for the anti-gunners was the essential patch to their gun-grabbing bill.
And anybody who claims the "grandfathering" of present owners means this is not a "grab" is fooling themselves.
There will be people like me who refuse to register a gun that is already in my safe. I had to export some of my rifles to a free state. Even today I can't fire my $2000 AR-10 target rifle.
Then there is the fact that nobody can buy such guns after the passage of the infringement. My friends and family who could benefit from my advice on what arms are suitable for their use, are unable to own the very weapons that I am familiar with and recommend.
And the final insult is that the state has outlawed inheritance by my children of the infringed arms. If I really still "owned" these rifles, then I would be able to pass them on to my children with the rest of my estate. That is now outlawed.
The anti-gunners only survive because it is illegal to treat them as they deserve to be treated.