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.

  • Coach@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    1 year ago

    Simple solution: tax the ever-loving fuck out of bullets. $1000 per. Call it a “true cost adjustment.”

    • Jeremy [Iowa]@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      1 year ago

      I wish you the best of luck with that. Poor taxes were the strategy behind the NFA - its incredible unpopularity guarantees it won’t make it through either branch of Congress let alone both.

    • Bakkoda@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      1 year ago

      What a brilliantly uneducated idea. Thanks for turning my hunting season into a 3k dollar minimum adventure instead of a cheap way for me to put food on my table.

        • RaoulDook@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          We do during bow season, and then we hunt with rifles during rifle season. It’s the best way to get more deer meat in the freezer.

      • JokeDeity@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        Oh fuck off. No one gives a flying fuck about your bloodlust beyond other psychos.

          • JokeDeity@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            It literally is when we live in this day and age. If you aren’t living in a tribe somewhere, the bottom line is, you do this because you want to end something’s life.

            • Jeremy [Iowa]@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              It literally is when we live in this day and age.

              I’ll be sure to inform my hunting friends we’re all full of bloodlust for our interest in filling the freezer with cheap, quality meat which also serves to provide population control for an invasive and damaging species because a rando on the Internet said so.

              I feel for you and your apparent limited ability to consider other situations.

    • Draupnir@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      Says the guy who is vastly unaware of how many responsibly armed citizens they cross paths with on a daily basis, and who have demonstrably prevented mass shootings. You have no idea the hidden safety net you live under and yet you want it destroyed because of the few bad actors.

      • Coach@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        And just in case you’re looking for your “good guys with a gun,” they’re all standing outside of a school, waiting and shitting their pants. It’s pathetic.

        • Jeremy [Iowa]@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’m not sure anyone - anyone - would argue police are “good guys”. If anything, they’re an active demonstration that those in power cannot be the only ones with firearms given the extent to which they maliciously misuse that power.

          But sure - use the incompetence and cowardice of a given police department as some absurd emotional appeal.

      • Coach@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yup. Yes. A few bad actors spoiled it for the rest of you. Waa waa waa…grow up. Y’all can’t figure out if guns are a hobby or a necessity, but you seem to always fall back on both points pretty quickly. It’s sad that your “interests” seem to threaten our very existence, yet you feel like you have some inalienable right to kill others. It’s extremely sad and disappointing. I suggest you grow up and find other ways to entertain yourself.

        • Jeremy [Iowa]@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          1 year ago

          Waa waa waa…grow up.

          Yikes, the projection.

          Y’all can’t figure out if guns are a hobby or a necessity, but you seem to always fall back on both points pretty quickly.

          Oh? I’m not sure how you interpreted their highlight of the sheer commonality of those legally carrying with no issue as either of these things.

          It’s sad that your “interests” seem to threaten our very existence, yet you feel like you have some inalienable right to kill others.

          I’m not sure how you feel threatened by the mere existence of inanimate objects. Even extrapolating to the action - that of homicide - I’m not sure how you’d feel threatened by such a thing, especially so disproportionately to its lack of prevalence related to the other ways you can be killed and their statistical likelihood.

          I’m also not sure how you interpret the right to bear arms - repeatedly highlighted for self-defense purposes in judgements and judge opinions - as somehow an inalienable right to kill others. Unless I’m missing something, that kill others part tends to result in the offender spending quite some time in prison.

          It’s extremely sad and disappointing. I suggest you grow up and find other ways to entertain yourself.

          You may wish to take your own advice - you seem unable to think beyond your own preconceived and irrational views on a thing, even aside from your demonstrated inability to consider how your criticisms and suggestions might apply to yourself rather hypocritically.

      • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        None, because I don’t live in a shithole where you need guns in order to feel safe in your own home.

        • RaoulDook@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          You seem like a pleasant individual, wishing death on those you disagree with views on Constitutional rights.

          FYI the powder used in manufacturing ammo is not explosive. Smokeless powder simply burns fast, and it’s generally safe and relatively easy to construct your own ammo at home. I have a couple of reloading presses at home, have made hundreds of cartridges of high quality ammo for cheaper than you can buy it. The cartridges that I produce with novice to intermediate level experience on the press are actually higher quality than factory ammo, unless you spend extra for the Match Grade stuff.

    • BaldProphet@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Ah yes, let’s just arbitrarily throw out the Bill of Rights and make it so that only rich people can access tools with which to protect themselves.