Author Topic: Federal Judge Blocks High Capacity Magazine Ban in California  (Read 1295 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline FunkyZero

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1645
  • Reputation: +162/-11
  • ha ha, charade you are
https://apnews.com/9b92b4952e524027bbd7dd86c9545053


Quote
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — A federal judge on Thursday blocked a California law set to take effect Saturday that would have barred gun owners from possessing high-capacity ammunition magazines.

The judge ruled that the ban approved by the Legislature and voters last year takes away gun owners’ Second Amendment rights and amounts to the government taking people’s private property without compensation.

California law has prohibited buying or selling the magazines since 2000, but until now allowed those who had them to keep them.

“Hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of otherwise law-abiding citizens will have an untenable choice: become an outlaw or dispossess one’s self of lawfully acquired property,” San Diego-based U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez wrote.

He issued a preliminary injunction blocking the law from taking effect while he considers the underlying lawsuit filed by the National Rifle Association-affiliated California Rifle & Pistol Association.

Meanwhile, a Sacramento-based judge on Thursday rejected a similar challenge by several other gun owners’ rights organizations, creating what Ari Freilich, staff attorney at the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, called “dueling opinions” that may be sorted out on appeal.

Offline Old n Grumpy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1610
  • Reputation: +179/-5
Re: Federal Judge Blocks High Capacity Magazine Ban in California
« Reply #1 on: July 01, 2017, 08:37:29 AM »
This is a good thing, banning and making you get rid of items that were legal previously is a slippery slope.
Not to mention thet the right to keep and bear arms shall be uninfringed.

Several states and localities have gone to far and need to be reined in.

I hope the folks out there win this and can get back some more of their guns rights.
Basking in the glow of my white Privilege, while I water the Begonias with liberal tears!

Air is Free, that's why we need a carbon tax.

Offline SVPete

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12425
  • Reputation: +772/-167
Re: Federal Judge Blocks High Capacity Magazine Ban in California
« Reply #2 on: July 01, 2017, 09:42:16 AM »
This is a good thing, banning and making you get rid of items that were legal previously is a slippery slope.
Not to mention thet the right to keep and bear arms shall be uninfringed.

Several states and localities have gone to far and need to be reined in.

I hope the folks out there win this and can get back some more of their guns rights.

Actually, it's a slippery slope and worse. The "worse" part is that it's an uncompensated "taking" (violating the Fifth Amendment) or a taking of property without due process (violating the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment). The slippery slope is that if this is allowed to stand, additional laws will become possible and be passed - the Ds have a veto-proof legislature - that, step by step, nullify the Second Amendment by making gun ownership and use all but impossible (or impossibly expensive).

As I posted in the Shoutbox, here's what I believe will happen:

* If he hasn't already, AG Becerra will appeal this to the 9th Circus Court;

* Normal process is that the case will be heard by a 3 judge panel; there are some non-loon judges on the 9th, so how the panel rules probably depends on who is on the panel;

* Regardless of how the panel rules, either the AG or NRA will appeal to the full 9th Circus Court, and the law will be upheld (unless the 9th has one of its occasional fits of sanity - it has happened);

* Regardless of how the 9th Circus Court rules, either the AG or NRA will appeal to the USSC*.

I think, if/when it gets to that point, the USSC will decide to hear the case. At that point, who is on the court gets interesting. As it currently stands, unless a liberal or 2 has a fit of sanity (as they did in the Trinity Lutheran case), Weather Vane Kennedy will probably be the deciding vote. OTOH, if Kennedy retires and/or if Ginsburg retires or succumbs to her health problems and Trump's nominee(s) are confirmed, it is likely the law would be overturned. But ...

* ... if the 9th Circus has a fit of sanity and there is 1 or 2 more Trump appointees on the USSC, AG Becerra might decide not to appeal to the USSC, in which case the sane decision of the 9th would only be binding in the 9th Circuit (that kind of thing has also been done, e.g. in Calabretta vs. Floyd, et al, where the 9th had one of its fits of sanity but the case was not appealed to the USSC, to limit the "damage" done to CPS/DSS type agencies).
Note to "Warpy": I voted for Donald Trump! I would do so again!

Big CHEETO is WATCHING You!

Offline FlaGator

  • Another Pilgrim
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3460
  • Reputation: +314/-28
  • Stand firm in the faith; be men of courage
Re: Federal Judge Blocks High Capacity Magazine Ban in California
« Reply #3 on: July 01, 2017, 10:50:23 AM »
It is right next to the slippery slope that says the government can force you to buy something if they call it a tax.
Man’s greatness is so obvious that it can even be deduced from his wretchedness, for what is nature in animals we call wretchedness in man, thus recognizing that, if his nature is today like that of the animals, he must have fallen from some better state which was once his own.
Blaise Pascal