Those Ca. judges...

Maxrobot

Maxrobot

NES Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2017
Messages
4,550
Likes
13,242
Location
Nashua, N.H.
Feedback: 0 / 0 / 0
The ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld California's ban on gun magazines that hold more than 10 bullets Thursday, overturning a San Diego federal judge's finding that the law was unconstitutional.
The ban was originally challenged in a lawsuit brought by firearm advocates who claim it violates the Second Amendment, while the California Attorney General's Office has argued it serves as an obstacle for those seeking to carry out mass shootings.
www.nbcsandiego.com

Appeals court upholds California's ban on large capacity magazines, overturning San Diego judge

The ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld California's ban on gun magazines that hold more than 10 bullets Thursday, overturning a San Diego federal judge's finding that the law was unconstitutional.
www.nbcsandiego.com www.nbcsandiego.com
 
Maxrobot said:
The ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld California's ban on gun magazines that hold more than 10 bullets Thursday, overturning a San Diego federal judge's finding that the law was unconstitutional.
The ban was originally challenged in a lawsuit brought by firearm advocates who claim it violates the Second Amendment, while the California Attorney General's Office has argued it serves as an obstacle for those seeking to carry out mass shootings.
www.nbcsandiego.com

Appeals court upholds California's ban on large capacity magazines, overturning San Diego judge

The ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld California's ban on gun magazines that hold more than 10 bullets Thursday, overturning a San Diego federal judge's finding that the law was unconstitutional.
www.nbcsandiego.com www.nbcsandiego.com
Click to expand...
S

Thread '9th Circuit En Banc Rules As Expected For California In Duncan v. Bonta Mag Ban (Judge VanDyke Dissent Video Included)'

The Opinion:
Employing the methodology announced in New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen, 597 U.S. 1 (2022), the en banc court concluded that California’s law comported with the Second Amendment for two independent reasons. First, the text of the Second Amendment does not encompass the right to possess large-capacity magazines because large-capacity magazines are neither “arms” nor protected accessories. Second, even assuming that the text of the Second Amendment...
Click to expand...
  • Like
 
Thanks
S

Thread '9th Circuit En Banc Rules As Expected For California In Duncan v. Bonta Mag Ban (Judge VanDyke Dissent Video Included)'

The Opinion:
Employing the methodology announced in New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen, 597 U.S. 1 (2022), the en banc court concluded that California’s law comported with the Second Amendment for two independent reasons. First, the text of the Second Amendment does not encompass the right to possess large-capacity magazines because large-capacity magazines are neither “arms” nor protected accessories. Second, even assuming that the text of the Second Amendment...
Click to expand...
  • Like
 
Maxrobot said:
The ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld California's ban on gun magazines that hold more than 10 bullets Thursday, overturning a San Diego federal judge's finding that the law was unconstitutional.
The ban was originally challenged in a lawsuit brought by firearm advocates who claim it violates the Second Amendment, while the California Attorney General's Office has argued it serves as an obstacle for those seeking to carry out mass shootings.
www.nbcsandiego.com

Appeals court upholds California's ban on large capacity magazines, overturning San Diego judge

The ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld California's ban on gun magazines that hold more than 10 bullets Thursday, overturning a San Diego federal judge's finding that the law was unconstitutional.
www.nbcsandiego.com www.nbcsandiego.com
Click to expand...
And all the gang bangers frowned. They will now follow all the laws to be equal to the law abiding citizenry with handi-capped magazines. Good work.
 
Why is 10 or any number the magic number? The Constitutional answer should be that there is no magic number.

It is completely subjective to have a law that restricts a firearm from being able operate and feed a round of ammunition when needed. A magazine or other feeding device or mechanism is an integral part of a firearm’s operation.

The argument that the exact and ever-changing technology of how ammunition is fed into a firearm is not protected by the Constitution is BS. How is this not clear as part of “shall not be infringed?”
 
Individualist said:
Why is 10 or any number the magic number? The Constitutional answer should be that there is no magic number.

It is completely subjective to have a law that restricts a firearm from being able operate and feed a round of ammunition when needed. A magazine or other feeding device or mechanism is an integral part of a firearm’s operation.

The argument that the exact and ever-changing technology of how ammunition is fed into a firearm is not protected by the Constitution is BS. How is this not clear as part of “shall not be infringed?”
Click to expand...
Just wait untill the magic number is 1
 
JDL said:
Just wait untill the magic number is 1
Click to expand...
Actually, they want to get it to 0, and don't worry, they (the anti-2A lobby/courts/politicians/lawyers) will re-assure us that "it does not infringe upon the second amendment" or some bullshit.

Anti gun laws seem to happen in waves, they chip away at what we can do with our rights, but a fierce and expensive legal battle and compromise prevents them from passing all the things they wanted; but they still got a few things through that now we are expected to obey. Unless a supreme court ruling smacks it all down, that is. When the compromise is made, people cope with shit like "b-but we can still have mags and rifles broo!"; failing to put into perspective that it is still a net loss for us.

This is the problem, it's like people keep settling for these compromises, there should be no compromise; anything they can take from us is one step closer to no guns. That is the problem, so no gun control laws or restrictions should be acceptable.
 
peterk123 said:
This is a big blow to 2A. Opens the door to not only further magazine bans, but anything considered an accessory. Lights, slings, red dots, sights, any upgrade to a firearm, etc.

Can't wait to see what Mass does.
Click to expand...
This is the same decision that was sent back by SCOTUS following Bruen, 3 years ago... almost word for word, in parts. It's not a big blow, we're just finally back where we left off.
 
Maxrobot said:
The ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld California's ban on gun magazines that hold more than 10 bullets
Click to expand...

Are they taking loose bullets and dropping them in the mags?

Because almost every mag can hold more than 10 bullets.
 
9th Circus.

I was in Tel Aviv when there were violent protests a la BLM but over Bibi's effort to control a liberal judiciary from legislating from the bench. Nearly identical SOP as all the Antifag and BLM riots here. I expect we'll need to do something about the anti-Constitution judges here and should expect the same paid agitator response.
 

Similar threads

Exciting times for those of us that like the EARLY BP arms.
Replies
0
Views
62
Lefty38-55
L
To those that USE 12ga Mini Shells
2
Replies
31
Views
737
Retired-LEO
Retired-LEO
Judge Upholds California Law Restricting 18- to 20-Year-Olds' Access To Guns
Replies
6
Views
164
Road_Clam
R
Gun-Handling Judge Posts a Novel YouTube Dissent in Second Amendment Case
Replies
5
Views
180
pdm
pdm
9th Circuit En Banc Rules As Expected For California In Duncan v. Bonta Mag Ban (Judge VanDyke Dissent Video Included)
Replies
22
Views
725
Coyote33
Coyote33
Back
Top Bottom