California's assault on 2nd amendment stopped for now

[Preacher]

Federal judge blocks new California gun control law requiring disposal of large-capacity magazines

2aguy Hopefully this goes to the SC and gets overturned completely.

 

[2aguy]

Federal judge blocks new California gun control law requiring disposal of large-capacity magazines

2aguy Hopefully this goes to the SC and gets overturned completely.

Sadly, it first has to go to the 9th Circuit left wing court....and then we still have to see if kennedy is on the bench....

 

[Blackrook]

Note with concern that the left never tries to disarm the military or police, only the people.

 

[Little-Acorn]

There must be some mistake. This judge is agreeing with the 2nd amendment!

It has been a sad era where judges and pundits work overtime trying to find "exceptions" to the 2nd amendment's ban on govt infringing the right to keep and bear arms, which cannot be found anywhere in the amendment's text or the rest of the Constitution.

Now it appears that Judge Benitez actually reviewed his oath of office, and realized it's a judge's job to back up and enforce the 2nd amendment whether he likes it or not.

This revelation is a legal earthquake. Can you imagine what could happen to this country, if judges start deciding the Constitution is not merely a document to be evaded and ignored, but is actually the Law of the Land that must be obeyed?

The mind boggles.

This is an excellent start.

I wonder how this particular judge would react to a case where the govt forbids you from carrying a gun, unless you fill out an application, pay hundreds of dollars, go through six months of hearings... and then the government denies your application anyway on grounds that you don't "have enough reason" to carry?

---------------------------------------------

Judge blocks California's high-capacity magazine ban

Judge blocks California's high-capacity magazine ban

by Don Thompson, Associated Press 14 hours ago

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — A federal judge on Thursday blocked a California law set to take effect Saturday that would have barred gun owners from possessing high-capacity ammunition magazines.

The judge ruled that the ban approved by the Legislature last year takes away gun owners' Second Amendment rights and amounts to the government taking people's private property without compensation.

California law has prohibited buying or selling the magazines since 2000, but until now allowed those who had them to keep them.

"If this injunction does not issue, hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of otherwise law-abiding citizens will have an untenable choice: become an outlaw or dispossess one's self of lawfully acquired property," San Diego-based U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez wrote.

He issued a preliminary injunction blocking the law from taking effect while he considers the underlying lawsuit filed by the National Rifle Association-affiliated California Rifle & Pistol Association.

Had the ban taken effect, owners would have been required to get rid of their magazines by sending them out of state, altering them to hold no more than 10 bullets, destroying them or turning them into law enforcement agencies. Possession could have been punished by $100 fines or up to a year in jail.

 

[theHawk]

It was an utterly rediculous attempt by the kooks to make outlaws of law abiding citizens.

The proponents of that law should be charged with civil rights violations against the public.

 

[Confounding]

When you outlaw things that people want you're simply creating a boon for black market dealers.

 

[BluesLegend]

It won't matter how many times we win in court, California will continue to undermine our Constitutional rights by whatever means. Example: They tried to ban small scale gold mining in California, putting about 4,000 family businesses out of business. They got sued in court, lost and were ordered to begin issuing the permits again by the court. Instead California claimed they didn't have the money to issue the permits. This is classic liberalism, the law, the courts, the Constitution be damned they will do whatever they feel like.

 

[bitter clinging swiftie]

do these people not know the definition of the word infringe....now they are trying to call infringement "gun safety"...these people are pure evil

 

[Little-Acorn]

When you outlaw things that people want you're simply creating a boon for black market dealers.

When you outlaw things that the Constitution says you can't outlaw, are you committing treason?

No, you are not. You are merely breaking the law, and should be punished. Lucky for you the Constitution doesn't prescribe penalties for violating it.

 

[Confounding]

When you outlaw things that people want you're simply creating a boon for black market dealers.

When you outlaw things that the Constitution says you can't outlaw, are you committing treason?

No, you are not. You are merely breaking the law, and should be punished. Lucky for you the Constitution doesn't prescribe penalties for violating it.

I was agreeing with your general sentiment, dude. Outlawing firearms and firearm accessories is stupid because it simply creates a way for criminals to make money.

 

[2aguy]

do these people not know the definition of the word infringe....now they are trying to call infringement "gun safety"...these people are pure evil

They are masters at the word game.....they know how to present their authoritarianism in the best way to hide their real agenda....