Federal court strikes down California
ban on gun magazines for second time
Washington Examiner [DC],
by
Jenny Goldsberry
Original Article
Posted By: Dreadnought,
9/22/2023 11:29:33 PM
A federal judge yet again declared California's ban on gun magazines unconstitutional Friday.
The ban was first instituted in a 2000 measure signed into law by then-Gov. Gray Davis, a Democrat, and prohibited state residents from buying or selling magazines that hold 10 or more rounds. U.S. District Judge Roger T. Benitez struck it down after previously striking it in 2019. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned Benitez's ruling in 2021, arguing that the ban fell in line with the state's efforts to reduce gun violence and is compatible with the Second Amendment. Then, the Supreme Court vacated the appeals court ruling and ordered new proceedings consistent
Reply 1 - Posted by:
itsonlyme 9/22/2023 11:49:10 PM (No. 1561522)
Don't be surprised if the California Knotseez regroup and continue to trample on your rights according to their agenda.
14 people like this.
Reply 2 - Posted by:
WV.Hillbilly 9/23/2023 12:22:19 AM (No. 1561531)
"As this Court explained in its prior decision, “[a]rtificial limits will eventually lead to disarmament. It is an insidious plan to disarm the populace and it depends on for its success a subjective standard of ‘necessary’ lethality. It does not take the imagination of Jules Verne to predict that if all magazines over 10 rounds are somehow eliminated from California, the next mass shooting will be accomplished with guns holding only 10 rounds. To reduce gun violence, the state will close the newly christened 10-round ‘loophole’ and use it as a justification to outlaw magazines holding more than 7 rounds. The legislature will determine that no more than 7 rounds are ‘necessary.’ Then the next mass shooting will be accomplished with guns holding 7 rounds. To reduce the new gun violence, the state will close the 7-round ‘loophole’ and outlaw magazines holding more than 5 rounds determining that no more than 5 rounds are ‘suitable.’ And so it goes, until the only lawful firearm law-abiding responsible citizens will be permitted to possess is a single-shot handgun. Or perhaps, one gun, but no ammunition. Or ammunition issued only to persons deemed trustworthy.”
24 people like this.
Reply 3 - Posted by:
Lawsy0 9/23/2023 6:51:23 AM (No. 1561611)
Seems like that was one of Obama's tactics; lay off guns for a while but zero in on magazines and bullets.
11 people like this.
Reply 4 - Posted by:
chumley 9/23/2023 7:22:27 AM (No. 1561627)
I have a semi auto .44 mag carbine that only holds 4 rounds in a rotary magazine. I like the gun, but capacity is so small I dont carry it. It was never popular enough for anyone to make an after market larger cap mag. So when I'm running around in the woods or camping I carry something a little more capable. And I would not ever go to California.
9 people like this.
Reply 5 - Posted by:
Strike3 9/23/2023 8:44:17 AM (No. 1561684)
C'mon man, when you hold your Glock sideways and spray the street from passing cars, you need high capacity mags to make sure you hit a couple of little kids along with your intended target. A limit of ten rounds is not fair.
5 people like this.
Reply 6 - Posted by:
HonestDon 9/23/2023 10:44:18 AM (No. 1561758)
Dear Strike3, do you really think any who would hold their Glock sideways and "spray the street," give a spit about ANY gun laws? ALL gun laws, especially those in California, are aimed at disarming citizens - so we can be better CONTROLLED. Believe me, if the leftist/socialist democrats can neuter the second amendment, ALL the others will be sure to fall as well. Long live Big Brother!
Who is John Galt?
11 people like this.
Reply 7 - Posted by:
snowoutlaw 9/23/2023 10:51:26 AM (No. 1561764)
I have friends that destroyed their large magazines the first time. I thought screw that, they can't make me a criminal ex post facto.
5 people like this.
Reply 8 - Posted by:
DVC 9/23/2023 11:14:19 AM (No. 1561787)
The California AG knows he is just going through the motions. This has been all the way to SCOTUS, they vacated the previous finding of "constitutional" as wrong, and sent it back do to "do over, get it right this time".
My bet is that the Ninth will refuse to take the appeal, at least THEY know that his one is OVER.
This finding of "unconstitutional" is going to stand. And, even though he says he'll appeal, my bet is that he either will not file the appeal, or it will be quickly denied by the Ninth, since they have already run this one up and lost it at the SCOTUS level. The Cali AG may be stupid enough to try to do it again, but I can't see the Ninth Circuit taking the case at all.
6 people like this.
Reply 9 - Posted by:
PrayerWarrior 9/23/2023 1:08:12 PM (No. 1561865)
We didn't buy guns until we left CA. In Cali you have to register even the bullets. Evil Commies.
3 people like this.
Reply 10 - Posted by:
red1066 9/23/2023 1:28:30 PM (No. 1561874)
This should also apply to Maryland law which restricts gun magazine sizes to ten rounds.
3 people like this.
Reply 11 - Posted by:
DVC 9/23/2023 1:52:52 PM (No. 1561881)
Second and LAST time. This has been appealed to SCOTUS, who vacated an appeals court ruling that the law was constitutional, and sent it back to the lower courts to clean up their mess. Basically this is the quick and easy way to stomp on this without needing a full re-hearing at SCOTUS level. Basically, SCOTUS said,
"Can't you READ?" We decided this in the Bruen decision, and you have this WRONG. Now do it over, and get it right.
3 people like this.
Reply 12 - Posted by:
Omen55 9/23/2023 7:29:48 PM (No. 1562021)
So what mag do those tax paid guards protecting dem use?
0 people like this.
Below, you will find ...
Most Recent Articles posted by "Dreadnought"
and
Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)