Posted on 08/14/2020 12:34:26 PM PDT by cba123
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday threw out California’s ban on high-capacity ammunition magazines, saying the law violates the U.S. Constitution’s protection of the right to bear firearms.
“Even well-intentioned laws must pass constitutional muster,” appellate Judge Kenneth Lee wrote for the panel’s majority. California’s ban on magazines holding more than 10 bullets “strikes at the core of the Second Amendment — the right to armed self-defense.”
He noted that California passed the law “in the wake of heart-wrenching and highly publicized mass shootings,” but said that isn’t enough to justify a ban whose scope “is so sweeping that half of all magazines in America are now unlawful to own in California.”
(Please see full article at the link)
(Excerpt) Read more at apnews.com ...
Considering the real compliance to the safe act was about 1%, there are a lot of them out there.
We won for once. I, for one, am shocked. I knew that Trump was remaking the 9th, but this is outstanding.
It’s hard to make a magazine cycle properly that holds 60 rounds. Wind-up drums? 100 rounds, all day.
Okay. Twin 50 rd drums.
Only 3 judge panel. You know what that means. Maybe not over yet.
Previously, the opinion had discussed rural citizens that might need to be able to use firearms with large capacity magazines to prevent assault and burglary as police/sheriff response times may be quite long.
Further, some people, especially in communities of color, do not trust law enforcement and are less likely — over 40% less likely, according to one study — to call 911 even during emergencies. See 163 Cong. Rec. S1257-58 (daily ed. Feb. 16, 2017) (statement of Sen. Kamala Harris) (discussing a study showing that certain ethnic groups are over 40% less likely to call 911 in an emergency); see also
I love the fact that the judge us using the gun grabbing Harris' own words against her.
HA!
For some perverse reason, I prefer the 20 round magazines. Still recall how little and light they were compared to the 20 round M-14 mags. Running with five 7.62 loaded mags banging away on your belts was real pain.
Prone is a pain with 30-rounders.
How does that work? What is the exception the shop, and you, are going by?
I don’t remember how it was explained to me. But it would seem that everybody is ignoring the law. I told the guy in the shop by my house that the shop that I used to go to for magazines got broken into and went out of business. And I asked them if they could order me the magazines, and he said yes.
OK. I’m impressed and somewhat encouraged. :)
Send it to SCOTUS. Roberts will reinstate it.
Locked and loaded let the shooting begin
Personally, I wouldn’t try a big box store. Try a small shop and just make a curious inquiry. Perhaps use my story.
I’m not really shopping. Just curious about what’s going on out there.
I bought so many mags for my SKS before the ban I could barely carry them all fully loaded.
What bugs me is not being able to buy a new pistol that uses mags with more than 15 rds. Among other reasons I’d like a new pistol or two more capacity is a big one.
If you don’t use em for shooting, they make great barter material.
Well, that’s what I got when I went. Picked up two Beretta 92 30 round magazines for about $80.
Yup, 20 is plenty, and a drum works but God is it heavy with 762 x 39.
Finally - a judge that thinks like I do - I usually state it as,
"The Constitution doesn't have a 'Noble Cause' clause"
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.