National Federal judge blocks California ban on magazines with more than 10 bullets

[U8395279]

Additional coverage of this development, by ABC News:

California's gun control efforts suffer 2 legal setbacks

.

 

[11Charlie]

Well @Ura-Ki maybe just maybe you were right. Things might be changing.

 

[RVTECH]

Forcing assailants to change magazines more frequently gives victims time to flee or subdue the shooter, Becerra argued in court filings.

Oh I see, lets condone the assailants actions but just slow them down a bit - yea lets make a game of 'tag' out of it so the victim may have a chance to run while the shooter is reloading - this is laughable - nearly a joke...

 

[Stomper]

Oh I see, lets condone the assailants actions but just slow them down a bit - yea lets make a game of 'tag' out of it so the victim may have a chance to run while the shooter is reloading - this is laughable - nearly a joke...

LOL.... it's takes less than (or about) a second to swap mags with a bit of practice.

 

[etrain16]

LOL.... it's takes less than (or about) a second to swap mags with a bit of practice.

Reminds me of this video from a few years ago - a Sherrif shows how a trained person can shoot just as fast with lower cap mags - showing mag capacity restrictions are completely worthless.

Mag capacity restriction only serve to make things harder for law abiding citizens while criminals will just ignore the law anyway.

 

[nammac]

Lets take the LONG VIEW with this, If it gets through with out the 9th screwing it up, then Oregon will be in a better position for the fight to move north! Remember, Kali is much bigger and carries a lot more votes, but it also has the power of setting president, especially IF it can get past the 9th or even better have the 9th try it, and SCOTUS over rule it! Once SCOTUS hears more cases like this, the more the Several States will be forced into Constitutional compliance!!!

^^^ This!!!

These cases need to be kicked up to the SCOTUS, for final decision on their Constitutionality... Perhaps with the change to conservative leadership and the rise of terrorism, people will grow a pair and help fight for their own rights...

 

[Dungannon]

Meanwhile, some gun shop owners in California are taking on Paypal for discriminating against their businesses. Ironically, their suit is based on a California law that prohibits discrimination based on occupation.
California Gun Shops Sue PayPal

 

[The Heretic]

Meanwhile, some gun shop owners in California are taking on Paypal for discriminating against their businesses. Ironically, their suit is based on a California law that prohibits discrimination based on occupation.
California Gun Shops Sue PayPal

Good for them

 

[Brutus57]

Did folks note CA judge ruled against high capacity mag ban? Nice to see a judge stand up to the liberals.

Brutus out

 

[Slobray]

Why yes they did.............

Federal judge blocks California ban on magazines with more than 10 bullets

It is a great win, but the only problem is that we all know how this plays out:

It will be appealed to the 9th Circus,
A three judge panel will uphold the lower courts decision,
The partisan activists of the 9th Circus will vote for it to be reheard en banc before the Court,
They will attempt to eviscerate the 2A,
SCOTUS will ignore it, upholding the 9th Circus infringement,
The citizens of the PDRK lose again.


Ray

 

[Diamondback]

Why yes they did.............

Federal judge blocks California ban on magazines with more than 10 bullets

It is a great win, but the only problem is that we all know how this plays out:

It will be appealed to the 9th Circus,
A three judge panel will uphold the lower courts decision,
The partisan activists of the 9th Circus will vote for it to be reheard en banc before the Court,
They will attempt to eviscerate the 2A,
SCOTUS will ignore it, upholding the 9th Circus infringement,
The citizens of the PDRK lose again.


Ray

Here's the worse part, for a possible timeline divergence:

It will be appealed to the 9th Circus,
A three judge panel will uphold the lower courts decision,
The partisan activists of the 9th Circus will vote for it to be reheard en banc before the Court,
They will attempt to eviscerate the 2A,
SCOTUS grants Cert,
Drunken Butt-f*** Kennedy sides with the Left and no more full-caps anywhere.
October '18 and his rumored retirement can't come soon enough...

 

[Slobray]

Here's the worse part, for a possible timeline divergence:

It will be appealed to the 9th Circus,
A three judge panel will uphold the lower courts decision,
The partisan activists of the 9th Circus will vote for it to be reheard en banc before the Court,
They will attempt to eviscerate the 2A,
SCOTUS grants Cert,
Drunken Butt-f*** Kennedy sides with the Left and no more full-caps anywhere.
October '18 and his rumored retirement can't come soon enough...

Yes, that is a possibility, but if the past is any indication of the future, SCOTUS will deny to hear it. They've pretty much refused to hear any 2A case since McDonald. Besides SCOTUS don't need to hear it for the anti's to win, because the partisan activists on the 9th Circus ensure that their decision goes for the anti's.............. Look at Peruta.



Ray

 

[Provincial]

If SCOTUS refuses to hear a case, does it mean that they have set a precedent? I think not, since the Supremes have not ruled on the issue. That means that the same issue could be brought before the SCOTUS at a later date, when there is a more favorable balance of Justices.

Wishful thinking?

 

[Diamondback]

But SCOTUS represents the For All The Marbles gamble... Ninth Circus blows it, that's only binding on the Nutty Ninth. SCOTUS upholds Ninth, the cancer spreads to the rest of the country.

Right now, they're in Loss Limiting mode, akin to the fallback into Bataan and across New Guinea before the resources are available to give our MacArthur and Halsey for the pushback up through the Solomons and back through NG the other way... or perhaps a better comparison, Heller I & II and McDonald were like the Battle of Britain: "not the beginning of the end, but maybe the end of the beginning."

Doesn't make any less suckage for us trapped behind enemy lines... I'm starting to think Oregon and Washington should do a Pop Swap, trade one state's Leftists for the other's Non-Leftists.

 

[Brutus57]

Having lived in Kommiefornia 7 months now..... This is at last a brief respite. I think the powerful part of it is the Anti 2A stance, but where the Dem gun grabbers shot themselves in the foot was the seizure of citizen's private property without compensation. Suck on that you farging kommunist ice holes. It is a small victory and gives precedence for overturning this crap.

Brutus out

 

[The Heretic]

Decision Released on Federal Judge's Rejection of Proposed California Restrictions - The Firearm Blog

 

[RicInOR]

Update:
Amicus Brief on California Confiscation of Standard Magazines

"Today I filed an amicus brief in Duncan v. Beccaria, a challenge to a California statute confiscating almost all magazines over 10 rounds. Last summer, a federal district court issued a temporary injunction against the confiscation statute. The case is now before a panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals." -- David B. Kopel|

 

[Stomper]

Does anyone have any doubt how the 9th circus is going to rule? Better pack your bags for an appeal to the SCOTUS....

 

[MrRob96]

Does anyone have any doubt how the 9th circus is going to rule? Better pack your bags for an appeal to the SCOTUS....

I know how they'll rule but it'll be interesting if the injunction gets upheld by a 3 judge panel, then the entire 9th reviews en banc. That way they can ensure their political bias can come forward without looking like as much bias.

 

[Slobray]

I know how they'll rule but it'll be interesting if the injunction gets upheld by a 3 judge panel, then the entire 9th reviews en banc. That way they can ensure their political bias can come forward without looking like as much bias.

I personally believe that the partisan activists of the 9th Circus really don't care if their bias shows, it only matters that their political agenda is upheld. The en banc is usually used only as a last resort to ensure that their political objective is met. Because of certain procedural rules, they can't stack the panels with anti's, as they wish. As their history shows, if they get an anti-gun ruling from one of the 3 judge panels (such as Northwest School of Safety v. Ferguson), it stops there with no more actions taken, but on those occasions when (because of said pesky rules) they get a pro-gun ruling (usually 2 to 1), that's when they turn to the en banc to secure "the proper" ruling.

If those partisan activists of the 9th Circus really believe that their SOP makes them look unbiased in the public eye, then they are the truly fools, as the only ones they are fooling is themselves.


Ray