Permanent injunction against 10 round magazine ban? In California? Excellent....

[2aguy]

Finally, common sense makes a slight comeback in Cali. We continue to need good and FAIR laws.

"The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California ruled Friday that California’s ban on ammunition magazines holding more than ten rounds violates the Second Amendment.
On June 29, 2017, Breitbart News reported that U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez blocked the implementation of California’s “high-capacity” magazine ban two days before it was to go into effect. He noted that the ban could not survive the test of District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), noting: “When the simple test of Heller is applied … the statute is adjudged an unconstitutional abridgment.”

On July 17, 2018, a three-judge panel from the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld Benitez’s ruling, voting 2-to-1 against the ban and sending the case back to Benitez."

Federal Judge: California's 'High-Capacity' Magazine Ban Unconstitutional

In 2013, Colorado passed a limit of 15 rounds. It was fought all the way in courts. It was upheld. It appears that California just has to increase the limit to 15 and it complies with the intent of Heller V where MOST semi auto handguns will have right around 10 or more capacity. 10 is not a good limit. I prefer the 20 limit myself but I can live with 15.

And more.....

The Attorney General argues, even so, that it is permissible to ban common handguns with common magazines holding more than 10 rounds because the possession of firearms with other smaller magazines is allowed.29

But Heller says, “t is no answer to say . . . that it is permissible to ban the possession of handguns so long as the possession of other firearms (i.e., long guns) is allowed.” 554 U.S. at 629; Caetano v. Massachusetts, 136 S. Ct. 1027, 1033 (2016) (Alito, J., and Thomas, J., concurring) (“But the right to bear other weapons is ‘no answer’ to a ban on the possession of protected arms.”).

Heller says, “It is enough . . . that the American people have considered the handgun to be the quintessential self-defense weapon.” Id. California’s complete prohibition of common handguns with commonly-sized magazines able to hold more than 10 rounds is invalid.30 “A weapon may not be banned unless it is both dangerous and unusual.” Caetano v. Massachusetts, 136 S. Ct. 1027, 1031 (2016) (Alito, J., and Thomas, J., concurring) (emphasis in original). To the extent that magazines holding more than 10 rounds may be less common within California, it would likely be the result of the State long criminalizing the buying, selling, importing, and manufacturing of these magazines. Saying that large capacity magazines are uncommon because they have been banned for so long is something of a tautology. It cannot be used as constitutional support for further banning.

 

[2aguy]

Finally, common sense makes a slight comeback in Cali. We continue to need good and FAIR laws.

"The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California ruled Friday that California’s ban on ammunition magazines holding more than ten rounds violates the Second Amendment.
On June 29, 2017, Breitbart News reported that U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez blocked the implementation of California’s “high-capacity” magazine ban two days before it was to go into effect. He noted that the ban could not survive the test of District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), noting: “When the simple test of Heller is applied … the statute is adjudged an unconstitutional abridgment.”

On July 17, 2018, a three-judge panel from the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld Benitez’s ruling, voting 2-to-1 against the ban and sending the case back to Benitez."

Federal Judge: California's 'High-Capacity' Magazine Ban Unconstitutional

In 2013, Colorado passed a limit of 15 rounds. It was fought all the way in courts. It was upheld. It appears that California just has to increase the limit to 15 and it complies with the intent of Heller V where MOST semi auto handguns will have right around 10 or more capacity. 10 is not a good limit. I prefer the 20 limit myself but I can live with 15.

And the AR-15....mentioned again as protected by the 2nd Amendment....

Since the 1980s, one of the most popular handguns in America has been the Glock 17 pistol, which is designed for, and typically sold with, a 17-round magazine. One of the most popular youth rifles in America over the last 60 years has been the Ruger 10/22. Six million have been sold since it was introduced in 1964. It is designed to use magazines manufactured by Ruger in a variety of sizes: 10-round, 15-round, and 25- round.

Over the last three decades, one of the most popular civilian rifles in America is the much maligned AR-15 style rifle. Manufactured with various characteristics by numerous companies, it is estimated that more than five million have been bought since the 1980s. These rifles are typically sold with 30-round magazines. These commonly-owned guns with commonly-sized magazines are protected by the Second Amendment and Heller’s simple test for responsible, law-abiding citizens to use for target practice, hunting, and defense.

 

[Erinwltr]

Finally, common sense makes a slight comeback in Cali. We continue to need good and FAIR laws.

"The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California ruled Friday that California’s ban on ammunition magazines holding more than ten rounds violates the Second Amendment.
On June 29, 2017, Breitbart News reported that U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez blocked the implementation of California’s “high-capacity” magazine ban two days before it was to go into effect. He noted that the ban could not survive the test of District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), noting: “When the simple test of Heller is applied … the statute is adjudged an unconstitutional abridgment.”

On July 17, 2018, a three-judge panel from the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld Benitez’s ruling, voting 2-to-1 against the ban and sending the case back to Benitez."

Federal Judge: California's 'High-Capacity' Magazine Ban Unconstitutional

In 2013, Colorado passed a limit of 15 rounds. It was fought all the way in courts. It was upheld. It appears that California just has to increase the limit to 15 and it complies with the intent of Heller V where MOST semi auto handguns will have right around 10 or more capacity. 10 is not a good limit. I prefer the 20 limit myself but I can live with 15.

Moron.....it doesn't comply with the intent of Heller, as this ruling shows.....read the ruling......this judge explains it in a way that even you might be able to understand it...

You've been on USMB for a while. I guess you feel comfortable calling folks morons, and by the way, you don't own the gun threads.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Finally, common sense makes a slight comeback in Cali. We continue to need good and FAIR laws.

"The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California ruled Friday that California’s ban on ammunition magazines holding more than ten rounds violates the Second Amendment.
On June 29, 2017, Breitbart News reported that U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez blocked the implementation of California’s “high-capacity” magazine ban two days before it was to go into effect. He noted that the ban could not survive the test of District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), noting: “When the simple test of Heller is applied … the statute is adjudged an unconstitutional abridgment.”

On July 17, 2018, a three-judge panel from the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld Benitez’s ruling, voting 2-to-1 against the ban and sending the case back to Benitez."

Federal Judge: California's 'High-Capacity' Magazine Ban Unconstitutional

In 2013, Colorado passed a limit of 15 rounds. It was fought all the way in courts. It was upheld. It appears that California just has to increase the limit to 15 and it complies with the intent of Heller V where MOST semi auto handguns will have right around 10 or more capacity. 10 is not a good limit. I prefer the 20 limit myself but I can live with 15.

Here......read this and learn something....

1. The Supreme Court’s Simple Heller Test In Heller, the U.S. Supreme Court provided a simple Second Amendment test in crystal clear language.

It is a test that anyone can understand. The right to keep and bear arms is a right enjoyed by law-abiding citizens to have arms that are not unusual “in common use” “for lawful purposes like self-defense.” District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570, 624 (2008); Heller v. District of Columbia (“Heller II”), 670 F.3d 1244, 1271 (2011) (Kavanaugh, J., dissenting) (“In my view, Heller and McDonald leave little doubt that courts are to assess gun bans and regulations based on text, history, and tradition, not by a balancing test such as strict or intermediate scrutiny.”). It is a hardware test. Is the firearm hardware commonly owned? Is the hardware commonly owned by law-abiding citizens? Is the hardware owned by those citizens for lawful purposes?

If the answers are “yes,” the test is over. The hardware is protected. Millions of ammunition magazines able to hold more than 10 rounds are in common use by law-abiding responsible citizens for lawful uses like self-defense.

This is enough to decide that a magazine able to hold more than 10 rounds passes the Heller test and is protected by the Second Amendment.

The simple test applies because a magazine is an essential mechanical part of a firearm. The size limit directly impairs one’s ability to defend one’s self.

Neither magazines, nor rounds of ammunition, nor triggers, nor barrels are specifically mentioned in the Second Amendment. Neither are they mentioned in Heller. But without a right to keep and bear triggers, or barrels, or ammunition and the magazines that hold ammunition, the Second Amendment right would be meaningless.

-----

Because magazines feed ammunition into certain guns, and ammunition is necessary for such a gun to function as intended, magazines are ‘arms’ within the meaning of the Second Amendment.”) (citations omitted).

Consequently, the same analytical approach ought to be applied to both firearms and the ammunition magazines designed to make firearms function. Under the simple test of Heller, California’s § 32310 directly infringes Second Amendment rights. It directly infringes by broadly prohibiting common firearms and their common magazines holding more than 10 rounds, because they are not unusual and are commonly used by responsible, law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes such as self defense. And “that is all that is needed for citizens to have a right under the Second Amendment to keep such weapons.” Friedman v. City of Highland Park, 136 S. Ct. 447, 449 (2015) (Justices Thomas and Scalia dissenting from denial of certiorari) (commenting on what Heller’s test requires).

And California did not meet the Heller test with 10 but Colorado did with 15. Under Duncan v. Becerra it's spelled out even better. What the court did was not to throw the case out but to more or less suspend the case. It allows California the chance to change the max to 15 to meet the Heller Test.

It's a bit immature to break out the kegs and hard stuff, go shooting in the air and party for the next 3 days like I know you all want to do since the Court is giving California the chance to fix the law before it goes into force. Maybe next time.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Finally, common sense makes a slight comeback in Cali. We continue to need good and FAIR laws.

"The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California ruled Friday that California’s ban on ammunition magazines holding more than ten rounds violates the Second Amendment.
On June 29, 2017, Breitbart News reported that U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez blocked the implementation of California’s “high-capacity” magazine ban two days before it was to go into effect. He noted that the ban could not survive the test of District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), noting: “When the simple test of Heller is applied … the statute is adjudged an unconstitutional abridgment.”

On July 17, 2018, a three-judge panel from the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld Benitez’s ruling, voting 2-to-1 against the ban and sending the case back to Benitez."

Federal Judge: California's 'High-Capacity' Magazine Ban Unconstitutional

In 2013, Colorado passed a limit of 15 rounds. It was fought all the way in courts. It was upheld. It appears that California just has to increase the limit to 15 and it complies with the intent of Heller V where MOST semi auto handguns will have right around 10 or more capacity. 10 is not a good limit. I prefer the 20 limit myself but I can live with 15.

Moron.....it doesn't comply with the intent of Heller, as this ruling shows.....read the ruling......this judge explains it in a way that even you might be able to understand it...

You've been on USMB for a while. I guess you feel comfortable calling folks morons, and by the way, you don't own the gun threads.

He stepped all over his do do on this one. The law isn't in force yet and the Court is giving California the chance to change it from a max of 10 to a max of at least 15 rounds in a mag and still make it to the release date for the law to go into affect. I thought there might be something like that since my state defended it's 15 round mag max and California's 10 was bounced. Now I know it's called the Heller Test.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Finally, common sense makes a slight comeback in Cali. We continue to need good and FAIR laws.

"The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California ruled Friday that California’s ban on ammunition magazines holding more than ten rounds violates the Second Amendment.
On June 29, 2017, Breitbart News reported that U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez blocked the implementation of California’s “high-capacity” magazine ban two days before it was to go into effect. He noted that the ban could not survive the test of District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), noting: “When the simple test of Heller is applied … the statute is adjudged an unconstitutional abridgment.”

On July 17, 2018, a three-judge panel from the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld Benitez’s ruling, voting 2-to-1 against the ban and sending the case back to Benitez."

Federal Judge: California's 'High-Capacity' Magazine Ban Unconstitutional

In 2013, Colorado passed a limit of 15 rounds. It was fought all the way in courts. It was upheld. It appears that California just has to increase the limit to 15 and it complies with the intent of Heller V where MOST semi auto handguns will have right around 10 or more capacity. 10 is not a good limit. I prefer the 20 limit myself but I can live with 15.

And the AR-15....mentioned again as protected by the 2nd Amendment....

Since the 1980s, one of the most popular handguns in America has been the Glock 17 pistol, which is designed for, and typically sold with, a 17-round magazine. One of the most popular youth rifles in America over the last 60 years has been the Ruger 10/22. Six million have been sold since it was introduced in 1964. It is designed to use magazines manufactured by Ruger in a variety of sizes: 10-round, 15-round, and 25- round.

Over the last three decades, one of the most popular civilian rifles in America is the much maligned AR-15 style rifle. Manufactured with various characteristics by numerous companies, it is estimated that more than five million have been bought since the 1980s. These rifles are typically sold with 30-round magazines. These commonly-owned guns with commonly-sized magazines are protected by the Second Amendment and Heller’s simple test for responsible, law-abiding citizens to use for target practice, hunting, and defense.

Hate to bust your bubble but the Courts have already upheld the banning of the "AR-15 and it's various Clones" at stated and municipal levels. What they haven't upheld is the term "Assault Rifle" or Semi Automatic for a ban. Magazines of more than 15 have already been upheld in court because they meet the Heller Test while the 10 round does not. I disagree with that, myself, and would have put the limit at 20 but I can live with 15. There has to be a limit somewhere. If your gun, from the factory, comes with 17 round capacity, it's just too easy for the factory or the gun shop to put a plug in it or a simple rivet so it can only hold 15. No real big deal.

So now we know where the limit of the Heller Test is. It's 15.

 

[Aletheia4u]

They said that the Vegas' shooter used a bump stock firearm. Who in the hell will use a bump stock from that distance? The bump stock makes the weapon to shoot very inaccurate. It is hard to hold the weapon with a bump stock while shooting.

This in about magazines, but you're referring to the ban that went into effect. Personally, I would not use a bump stock because it makes the rifle more inaccurate. Who wants to be a milk shake while firing a semi-auto rifle anyway? However, it was legal to buy before. I did not want it banned based on the 2nd amendment. It was a constitutional matter but it's been made illegal.

What i'm trying to say is, that they are planning on creating another false-flag mass murder. They are warming up the stage with this guy, by pretending that he is on the side of the second amendment. .He is pretending that he is putting up a good fight, so that the second amendment advocates will trust every decision that he makes. And so then they are going to pretend that they are fighting over how many bullets a magazine can carry. But really that it is all an act. But once they manufactured another shooting with a shooter using a weapon that uses magazine that holds 11 rounds.. Then this guy will say, "I guess it is time to lower the rounds of bullets that goes into a magazines". Then he will go up to Pres.Trump and say, "Mr.president, I believe that it will be doing this country a great service to lower the use of rounds in a magazine". So then Pres.Trump will be put on the spot. That he will have to agree with what this guy say, because he was speaking so highly of him. And if he don't, that the media will say, "Look, even the President own highly trusted supporter says that they need to lower the rounds. But he will not listen". And so then Pres.Trump will have to or else he will look stupid. Second amendment advocates better stop putting everyone on a high pedestal that promotes their agendas.But put them on it after they has done the job, but not before the job is done.

 

[james bond]

What i'm trying to say is, that they are planning on creating another false-flag mass murder.

You make no sense. Is this another conspiracy theory? There were no new gun laws made to accommodate banning the bump stock. If there was a victory for the 2nd amendment, then that was it versus the gun control nutzies. Still, it was legal to buy before for whatever reason and now it's banned. If you have one, then you have to turn it in or destroy it.

 

[2aguy]

Finally, common sense makes a slight comeback in Cali. We continue to need good and FAIR laws.

"The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California ruled Friday that California’s ban on ammunition magazines holding more than ten rounds violates the Second Amendment.
On June 29, 2017, Breitbart News reported that U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez blocked the implementation of California’s “high-capacity” magazine ban two days before it was to go into effect. He noted that the ban could not survive the test of District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), noting: “When the simple test of Heller is applied … the statute is adjudged an unconstitutional abridgment.”

On July 17, 2018, a three-judge panel from the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld Benitez’s ruling, voting 2-to-1 against the ban and sending the case back to Benitez."

Federal Judge: California's 'High-Capacity' Magazine Ban Unconstitutional

In 2013, Colorado passed a limit of 15 rounds. It was fought all the way in courts. It was upheld. It appears that California just has to increase the limit to 15 and it complies with the intent of Heller V where MOST semi auto handguns will have right around 10 or more capacity. 10 is not a good limit. I prefer the 20 limit myself but I can live with 15.

Moron.....it doesn't comply with the intent of Heller, as this ruling shows.....read the ruling......this judge explains it in a way that even you might be able to understand it...

You've been on USMB for a while. I guess you feel comfortable calling folks morons, and by the way, you don't own the gun threads.

Never said I did......

 

[2aguy]

Finally, common sense makes a slight comeback in Cali. We continue to need good and FAIR laws.

"The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California ruled Friday that California’s ban on ammunition magazines holding more than ten rounds violates the Second Amendment.
On June 29, 2017, Breitbart News reported that U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez blocked the implementation of California’s “high-capacity” magazine ban two days before it was to go into effect. He noted that the ban could not survive the test of District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), noting: “When the simple test of Heller is applied … the statute is adjudged an unconstitutional abridgment.”

On July 17, 2018, a three-judge panel from the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld Benitez’s ruling, voting 2-to-1 against the ban and sending the case back to Benitez."

Federal Judge: California's 'High-Capacity' Magazine Ban Unconstitutional

In 2013, Colorado passed a limit of 15 rounds. It was fought all the way in courts. It was upheld. It appears that California just has to increase the limit to 15 and it complies with the intent of Heller V where MOST semi auto handguns will have right around 10 or more capacity. 10 is not a good limit. I prefer the 20 limit myself but I can live with 15.

Here......read this and learn something....

1. The Supreme Court’s Simple Heller Test In Heller, the U.S. Supreme Court provided a simple Second Amendment test in crystal clear language.

It is a test that anyone can understand. The right to keep and bear arms is a right enjoyed by law-abiding citizens to have arms that are not unusual “in common use” “for lawful purposes like self-defense.” District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570, 624 (2008); Heller v. District of Columbia (“Heller II”), 670 F.3d 1244, 1271 (2011) (Kavanaugh, J., dissenting) (“In my view, Heller and McDonald leave little doubt that courts are to assess gun bans and regulations based on text, history, and tradition, not by a balancing test such as strict or intermediate scrutiny.”). It is a hardware test. Is the firearm hardware commonly owned? Is the hardware commonly owned by law-abiding citizens? Is the hardware owned by those citizens for lawful purposes?

If the answers are “yes,” the test is over. The hardware is protected. Millions of ammunition magazines able to hold more than 10 rounds are in common use by law-abiding responsible citizens for lawful uses like self-defense.

This is enough to decide that a magazine able to hold more than 10 rounds passes the Heller test and is protected by the Second Amendment.

The simple test applies because a magazine is an essential mechanical part of a firearm. The size limit directly impairs one’s ability to defend one’s self.

Neither magazines, nor rounds of ammunition, nor triggers, nor barrels are specifically mentioned in the Second Amendment. Neither are they mentioned in Heller. But without a right to keep and bear triggers, or barrels, or ammunition and the magazines that hold ammunition, the Second Amendment right would be meaningless.

-----

Because magazines feed ammunition into certain guns, and ammunition is necessary for such a gun to function as intended, magazines are ‘arms’ within the meaning of the Second Amendment.”) (citations omitted).

Consequently, the same analytical approach ought to be applied to both firearms and the ammunition magazines designed to make firearms function. Under the simple test of Heller, California’s § 32310 directly infringes Second Amendment rights. It directly infringes by broadly prohibiting common firearms and their common magazines holding more than 10 rounds, because they are not unusual and are commonly used by responsible, law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes such as self defense. And “that is all that is needed for citizens to have a right under the Second Amendment to keep such weapons.” Friedman v. City of Highland Park, 136 S. Ct. 447, 449 (2015) (Justices Thomas and Scalia dissenting from denial of certiorari) (commenting on what Heller’s test requires).

And California did not meet the Heller test with 10 but Colorado did with 15. Under Duncan v. Becerra it's spelled out even better. What the court did was not to throw the case out but to more or less suspend the case. It allows California the chance to change the max to 15 to meet the Heller Test.

It's a bit immature to break out the kegs and hard stuff, go shooting in the air and party for the next 3 days like I know you all want to do since the Court is giving California the chance to fix the law before it goes into force. Maybe next time.

You don't know what you are talking about...

 

[2aguy]

Finally, common sense makes a slight comeback in Cali. We continue to need good and FAIR laws.

"The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California ruled Friday that California’s ban on ammunition magazines holding more than ten rounds violates the Second Amendment.
On June 29, 2017, Breitbart News reported that U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez blocked the implementation of California’s “high-capacity” magazine ban two days before it was to go into effect. He noted that the ban could not survive the test of District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), noting: “When the simple test of Heller is applied … the statute is adjudged an unconstitutional abridgment.”

On July 17, 2018, a three-judge panel from the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld Benitez’s ruling, voting 2-to-1 against the ban and sending the case back to Benitez."

Federal Judge: California's 'High-Capacity' Magazine Ban Unconstitutional

In 2013, Colorado passed a limit of 15 rounds. It was fought all the way in courts. It was upheld. It appears that California just has to increase the limit to 15 and it complies with the intent of Heller V where MOST semi auto handguns will have right around 10 or more capacity. 10 is not a good limit. I prefer the 20 limit myself but I can live with 15.

And the AR-15....mentioned again as protected by the 2nd Amendment....

Since the 1980s, one of the most popular handguns in America has been the Glock 17 pistol, which is designed for, and typically sold with, a 17-round magazine. One of the most popular youth rifles in America over the last 60 years has been the Ruger 10/22. Six million have been sold since it was introduced in 1964. It is designed to use magazines manufactured by Ruger in a variety of sizes: 10-round, 15-round, and 25- round.

Over the last three decades, one of the most popular civilian rifles in America is the much maligned AR-15 style rifle. Manufactured with various characteristics by numerous companies, it is estimated that more than five million have been bought since the 1980s. These rifles are typically sold with 30-round magazines. These commonly-owned guns with commonly-sized magazines are protected by the Second Amendment and Heller’s simple test for responsible, law-abiding citizens to use for target practice, hunting, and defense.

Hate to bust your bubble but the Courts have already upheld the banning of the "AR-15 and it's various Clones" at stated and municipal levels. What they haven't upheld is the term "Assault Rifle" or Semi Automatic for a ban. Magazines of more than 15 have already been upheld in court because they meet the Heller Test while the 10 round does not. I disagree with that, myself, and would have put the limit at 20 but I can live with 15. There has to be a limit somewhere. If your gun, from the factory, comes with 17 round capacity, it's just too easy for the factory or the gun shop to put a plug in it or a simple rivet so it can only hold 15. No real big deal.

So now we know where the limit of the Heller Test is. It's 15.

Moron, those state laws...as shown in Heller, Miller, Caetano, are unConstitutional....state and local judges do not Trump the Bill of Rights or the Supreme Court rulings.....I listed exactly where these bans fail the Heller test as pointed out in this ruling....you don't know what you are talking about.......you should stop.

 

[Flash]

This is a great ruling. Commie California's high capacity magazine ban has been overturned by the court.

It is about time Liberty prevailed after all this silly oppressive Libtard SJW bullshit.

The Legal Definition of what is Prohibited under California Penal Code 32310. Under Penal Code 32310(a), it is a crime if any person: manufactures or causes to be manufactured, imports into the state, keeps for sale, or offers or exposes for sale, or who gives, lends, buys, or receives any large-capacity magazine.

"Accordingly, based upon the law and the evidence, upon which there is no genuine issue, and for the reasons stated in this opinion, Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment is granted. California Penal Code § 32310 is hereby declared to be unconstitutional in its entirety and shall be enjoined."

http://michellawyers.com/wp-content...-2019-03-29-Order-Granting-Plaintiffs-MSJ.pdf

 

[rightwinger]

You now have the liberty to shoot up a classroom full of first graders

 

[Mr Natural]

Oh Boy!

Now you can go out and shoot 'em up without worrying about running out of ammo.

 

[hjmick]

Overturned.

For now.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

only amateurs would use a large capacity magazine. They jam way more often and it takes only a couple seconds to change a magazine if you know what you are doing.

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

You now have the liberty to shoot up a classroom full of first graders

That can happen with any firearm.

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

Finally, common sense makes a slight comeback in Cali. We continue to need good and FAIR laws.

"The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California ruled Friday that California’s ban on ammunition magazines holding more than ten rounds violates the Second Amendment.
On June 29, 2017, Breitbart News reported that U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez blocked the implementation of California’s “high-capacity” magazine ban two days before it was to go into effect. He noted that the ban could not survive the test of District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), noting: “When the simple test of Heller is applied … the statute is adjudged an unconstitutional abridgment.”

On July 17, 2018, a three-judge panel from the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld Benitez’s ruling, voting 2-to-1 against the ban and sending the case back to Benitez."

Federal Judge: California's 'High-Capacity' Magazine Ban Unconstitutional

Of course its unconstitutional. There is no other interpretation for "Shall not be infringed". Any regulation or ban that restricts the 2nd Amendment for law abiding citizens is illegal.

 

[Flash]

For you Californians now that you are free.

PSA has the magazines for $7. Buy them deep and stack them high.

https://palmettostatearmory.com/d-h...Avantlink&utm_medium=Referral&utm_campaign=cl

D&H 5.56 30rd Aluminum Magazine

1273 Reviews | 47 Questions, 211 Answers
In stock
$ 6.99

 

[Flash]