Judge Rules California’s Ban On “Large Capacity Magazines” Un-Constitutional

See, according to gun grabbers, 10 round magazines are safe. 11 rounds are doom

Prop. 63: Federal judge declares California’s ban on high-capacity gun magazines unconstitutional

A federal judge on Friday declared unconstitutional a key provision of California’s Proposition 63 that banned possession of high-capacity gun magazines often used in mass shootings, ensuring that the voter-approved prohibition will remain tied up in court for some time to come.

San Diego-based U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez wrote in his 86-page decision, upholding a lawsuit against the proposed ban of magazines holding more than 10 rounds, that such a statute “hits at the center of the Second Amendment and its burden is severe.”

“Individual liberty and freedom are not outmoded concepts,” he wrote. (snip)

A 2000 law had already made it illegal for Californians to buy or sell magazines that hold more than 10 cartridges, but it allowed people who already owned them to keep them. Prop. 63, among other provisions which tightened ammo regulations, went a step further by requiring anyone who owned such magazines to turn them in, remake them to comply with the law, or send them out of state.

That law never took effect as it was pending lawsuits, and now the whole scheme about restricting magazine size has been stopped. Expect suits in other states.

In his Friday ruling, the judge cited three home invasions in which women fought against the attackers and, he said, would have been more effective if they’d had higher-capacity gun magazines. He wrote that although mass shootings are “tragic,” they are far less prevalent than robberies, aggravated assaults and homicides in homes — and those more common crimes sometimes require maximum firepower because “unless a law-abiding individual has a firearm for his or her own defense, the police typically arrive after it is too late.

“The size limit (on magazines) directly impairs one’s ability to defend one’s self,” he wrote.

The judge has specifically enjoined California AG Xavier Becerra from enforcing the magazine ban, especially since Becerra attempted to defend the law using ….. articles from Mother Jones, rather than actual studies. The judge rips Becerra for this, going as far as explaining that “this is a federal court.” There’s a good thread at Twitchy from Gabrial Malor, who breaks down the ruling, as it is based on the Supreme Court’s Heller decision

Becerra will surely appeal, though he’ll have to get better material to back up his legal position. And, again, you can bet lawsuits will soon be filed against all states that have magazine bans.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

2 Responses to “Judge Rules California’s Ban On “Large Capacity Magazines” Un-Constitutional”

  1. xtron says:

    here’s my thoughts on most gun control proposals…..

    miller vs united states(1932) (this is the one that outlawed sawed off shotguns and most shorert barreled rifles) stated that weapons which have no military application are not protected by the second amendment. since the military uses high cap. mags, they are protected.

    garner vs tennessee (19??) stated that police cannot enforce the law at the point of a gun, that the weapons the police carry are for self defense only. given that police SWAT teams use high cap magazines, and the law must be applied equally for all citizens, the use of high cap mags cannot be barred to civilian citizens

    this argument also applys to AR-15’s. barrett 50’s, and 100 round auto loader clips

Bad Behavior has blocked 7747 access attempts in the last 7 days.