California cannot ban gun owners from having detachable magazines that hold more than 10 rounds, a federal judge ruled Friday.
The decision from U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez won’t take effect immediately. California Attorney General Rob Bonta, a Democrat, has already filed a notice to appeal the ruling. The ban is likely to remain in effect while the case is still pending.
This is the second time Benitez has struck down California’s law banning certain types of magazines. The first time he struck it down — way back in 2017 — an appeals court ended up reversing his decision.
As it should be.
This will likely make its way to the 9th circuit where it will be an easy defense thanks to Bruen.
On another note, this ruling contained delicious smack-downs for the most common and egregious attempts at various other bans. Love to see it.
Hold on tight to that smugness because you’re only ever two weeks away from yet another mass shooting by yet another legal gun owner.
I remember when that would-be school shooter was like, “Damn, I would have proceeded with this school shooting but I have a ammo limit! Nooooooo!”
You did? Isn’t this law new?
Do you remember when the Las Vegas shooter killed 60 people and and injured over 400 more (not counting the hundreds more injured while fleeing)?
You should, since it was the most deadly mass shooting in the history of America.
Anyway, he fired over 1000 rounds in the process but even with the record death toll, it still wasn’t enough to make the pro-gun community agree to ban bump stocks, despite them insisting they were just a range toy anyway.
So who needs your hypothetical shooter that’s impossible to measure when we have so many actual dead people just piling up because you repeatedly defend them.
I always love when people highlight an outlier as some sort of justification for sweeping change while also refusing to consider any sweeping change that isn’t the one they want.
Good guys with guns are outliers.