It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

9th Circuit Ends California Ban On High-Capacity Magazines

page: 1
37
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:
+14 more 
posted on Aug, 14 2020 @ 01:03 PM
link   
sacramento.cbslocal.com...

SACRAMENTO (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.” California Attorney General Xavier Becerra did not immediately say if he would ask the full appellate court to reconsider the ruling by the three judges, or if he would appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. He also did not immediately say if the state would seek a delay of the ruling to prevent an immediate buying spree. Sales are currently on hold based on a stay by the lower court and cannot immediately resume. California Rifle & Pistol Association attorney Chuck Michel called it “a huge victory” for gun owners “and the right to choose to own a firearm to defend your family.”


a wonderful Precedent for the 2nd amendment from the 9th circuit of all places ,and as article mentions no word on if it will be challenged to go further up the court system either to a full 9th circuit panel or all the way to supreme court.

personally i don't see him challenging it as if they try and fail at SCOTUS it would then apply nationally not just to the 9th circuits area of responsibility and then result in magazine bans in Chicago NY Boston etc all being rolled back pretty much neutering that aspect of gun control permanently. but all in all a pretty good day for those that favor the 2nd amendment

only put it in the mud pit as most 2nd amendment debates on here can get pretty heated.

what say you ats do you think they are going to challenge this farther up or will it just stay an issue for ca and the other states the 9th has rule over?


edit to add PDF on court ruling its self cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov...
edit on 14-8-2020 by RalagaNarHallas because: (no reason given)



+4 more 
posted on Aug, 14 2020 @ 01:24 PM
link   
About time.

Magazine size is important to a defender and irrelevant to the offender.



posted on Aug, 14 2020 @ 01:30 PM
link   
a reply to: projectvxn

yep pretty big win for the 2nd and the NRA who with that NY AG wanting to dissolve them probally needed a win like this right now

these are the "jurisdictions" the 9th holds sway over so in theory it should apply to the following states ballotpedia.org...

District of Alaska District of Arizona Central District of California Eastern District of California Northern District of California Southern District of California District of Hawaii District of Idaho District of Montana District of Nevada District of Oregon Eastern District of Washington Western District of Washington
so if im understanding this right any of those states that have such magazine restrictions are no longer valid? at least since this ruling and if brought to scotus and if they agree it could then apply NATIONALLY . this should strike down hawaiis magazine bans ,should stop the law they were trying to pass in WA state and revoke any laws on the book related to magazine size .idaho and MT (my state) have no such restrictions along with NV and AK so this seems to be effecting mostly the blue states of the west coast and goes to show it could go very badly if they challenge the law all the way to Scotus and risk it becoming a national precedent which would roll back magazine bans in about a third of US states



posted on Aug, 14 2020 @ 01:33 PM
link   
a reply to: RalagaNarHallas

That is correct.

This will get elevated to SCOTUS eventually. For the time being those restrictions no longer carry legal weight.



posted on Aug, 14 2020 @ 01:36 PM
link   
a reply to: RalagaNarHallas

I'm more interested in seeing if someone uses this as precedent to defend themselves in another state. If it goes unchallenged you could easily point to the ruling in a court in say Chicago...



posted on Aug, 14 2020 @ 01:37 PM
link   
a reply to: projectvxn

is it instantaneous? I haven't a clue how all that works.



posted on Aug, 14 2020 @ 01:41 PM
link   
I wish they would take it to the supreme court.



posted on Aug, 14 2020 @ 01:42 PM
link   
a reply to: RalagaNarHallas

Its nice to see that there's some semblance of sanity and respect for the original intent of the Constitution left in the judicial system. Unfortunately, I have little faith that this will be upheld when it is inevitably appealed to the full 9th Circus. Likewise, I would not count on the US Supreme Court, either, as they have completely ignored 2A cases in the last few years.



posted on Aug, 14 2020 @ 01:55 PM
link   
a reply to: RalagaNarHallas

There is hope. They must know how fun a safely fired AR-15 can be. Although gunstores in Quartzsite, Reno, and Yuma were California's real gun store. Now The 9th circuit court did something cool.
edit on 14-8-2020 by Degradation33 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 14 2020 @ 02:02 PM
link   
a reply to: network dude

i believe so , i wonder what happens to any one with pending charges for keeping a high cap mag i would assume they are released?

and at RickyD that could very well end up being the case. but i think for it to go all the way to SCOTUS they need conflicting rulings that they would then need to settle and bluntly SCOTUS would have to take the case as they seem to want to avoid any 2nd amendmnt rulings these days who even knows if they would take it ya know?



posted on Aug, 14 2020 @ 02:06 PM
link   
a reply to: network dude

They need a small amount of time to not enforce an unconstitutional law.

Which is to say that yes, immediately.



posted on Aug, 14 2020 @ 02:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Degradation33

Good luck buying a gun in Reno while being from California.

There is a lot of anti California discrimination and it's illegal.
edit on 8 14 2020 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 14 2020 @ 02:17 PM
link   
a reply to: RalagaNarHallas

SCOTUS indeed does want to avoid doing their jobs on this issue...always wondered why too. That doesn't stop someone in another state from using the precedent set by the court in this case in their defense else where. Not that thecourt in the other state has to agree with it but it would be a precedent that would open up appeals for days.



posted on Aug, 14 2020 @ 02:18 PM
link   
a reply to: projectvxn

Never tried in Neveda. Well, scratch that. Even private sellers selling parts? There's always Arizona..
edit on 14-8-2020 by Degradation33 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 14 2020 @ 02:23 PM
link   
a reply to: Degradation33

Private sellers tend to be very careful who they sell to. If they do sell to a Californian it's a felony. That weapon then crosses state lines? Another felony. Restricted weapon features? Another felony count per feature banned. Are you a federally restricted individual? That is another felony.

It's not worth the risk for most.



posted on Aug, 14 2020 @ 02:32 PM
link   
a reply to: projectvxn

It was so easy in Arizona (from what I hear). "Featureless" AR bought in one state accessorized in another.

I think they realized there were loopholes. Having people in other states, and other "less than kosher" methods. Bad suggestion for Nevada.
edit on 14-8-2020 by Degradation33 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 14 2020 @ 02:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: RalagaNarHallas

That is correct.

This will get elevated to SCOTUS eventually. For the time being those restrictions no longer carry legal weight.


SCOTUS is not accepting 2A cases until they see what happens w RBG. As it stands 2A would get buried and conservative justices are holding off.



posted on Aug, 14 2020 @ 03:20 PM
link   
NJ is pretty strict as well.



posted on Aug, 14 2020 @ 03:29 PM
link   
Good. There should be no laws made regarding how much ammunition a legally bought gun can carry.

And I just want to add for all of you partisan partisans, that California’s crazy gun laws were started by Republicans because the Black Panthers used there 2nd Amendment rights to protect their communities from an overreaching government.

Still waiting for the NRA folks to celebrate that.



posted on Aug, 14 2020 @ 04:20 PM
link   
a reply to: projectvxn

YEP! So continue secretly stockpiling them while realizing they are no longer illegal



new topics

top topics



 
37
<<   2 >>

log in

join