View Full Version : Judge Declares California Magazine Ban Unconstitutional
Nightvisionary
03-29-19, 18:40
In one of the strongest judicial statements in favor of the Second Amendment to date, Judge Roger T. Benitez of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California determined on Friday that California’s ban on commonly possessed firearm magazines violates the Second Amendment.
https://www.nraila.org/articles/20190329/breaking-federal-court-finds-california-magazine-ban-violates-the-second-amendment?fbclid=IwAR1rMDvT05_Y5KlD5FlOU5xM3_V_gvgTcJMRwrOin7TSilXuN82Vs_4eomc
Ho-lee sh!t!!!
There's hope for us yet
BrigandTwoFour
03-29-19, 19:40
I was going to make a post about it, too. I'm reading the decision now, it's a good one.
Here are some of the money shots so far.
Lethality is Not the Test
Some say that the use of "large capacity magazines" increases the lethality of gun violence. They point out that when large capacity magazines are used in mass shootings, more shots are fired, more people are wounded, and more wounds are fatal than in other mass shootings. That may or may not be true. Certainly, a gun when abused is lethal. A gun holdig more than 10 rounds is lethal to more people than a gun holding less than 10 rounds, but it is not constitutionally decisive.
Nothing in the Second Amendment makes lethality a factor to consider because a gun's lethality, or dangerousness, is assumed. The Second amendment does not exist to protect the right to bear down pillows and foam baseball bats. It protects guns and every gun is dangerous.
And this is from the citations and footnoes, same section:
Constitutional rights would be come meaningless if states could obiterate them by enacting incrementally more burdensome restrictions while arguing that a reviewing court must evaluate eah restriction by itself when determining its constitutionality.
Artificial limits will eventually lead to disarmament. It is an insidious plan to disarm the populace and it depends on for its success a subjective standard of "necessary" lethality.
It does not take the imagination of Jules Verne to rpedict that if all magazines over 10 rounds are somehow eliminated from California, the next mass shooting will be accomplished with guns holding only 10 rounds. To reduce gun violence, the state will close the newly christened 10-round "loophole" and use it as a justification to outlaw magazines holding more than 7 rounds. The legilsature will determine that no more than 7 rounds are "necessary." Then the next mass shooting will be accomplished with guns holding 7 rounds. To reduce the new gun violence, the state will close the 7-round "loophole" and outlaw magazines holding more than 5 rounds determining that no more than 5 rounds is "necessary."
And so it goes, until the only lawful firearm law-abiding responsible citizens will be permitted to possess is a single-shot handgun. Or perhaps, one gun, but no ammunition. Or ammunition issued only to persons deemed trustworthy.
This is not baseless speculation or scare-mongering. One need only look at New Jersey and New York. In the 1990's, New Jersey instituted a prohibition on what it would bale "large capacity ammunition magazines." These were defined as magazines able to hold more than 15 rounds. Slipping down the slope, last year, New Jersey lowered the capacity of permissible magazines from 15 to 10 rounds.
You can read more here: http://michellawyers.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Duncan-2019-03-29-Order-Granting-Plaintiffs-MSJ.pdf
It's 81 pages of well-reasoned and thoroughly cited material.
Judge Benitez is one of us, but you can bet this case will get challenged to the 9th. Trump's been on a tear appointing new judges to the 9th, so there's a good chance that a three-judge panel might go in our favor. But you can still bet that the state will appeal again to en banc, where it historically wins these fights. If they lose again, I'm not sure they'd want to take it to SCOTUS where NY, NJ, MD, VT, and CO would have their bans threatened as well.
The 9th won’t let this stand.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Don't worry, Cali will outlaw springs or something gay like that until they can win this
Diamondback
03-29-19, 20:45
Judge Benitez is one of us, but you can bet this case will get challenged to the 9th. Trump's been on a tear appointing new judges to the 9th, so there's a good chance that a three-judge panel might go in our favor. But you can still bet that the state will appeal again to en banc, where it historically wins these fights. If they lose again, I'm not sure they'd want to take it to SCOTUS where NY, NJ, MD, VT, and CO would have their bans threatened as well.
I don't think "Earl Warren 2.0" Roberts would have the balls to take this one... and we don't WANT him and his cock-remora Kavanaugh being the deciding votes on a SCOTUS that factoring them out is still 4-3 for the Other Team. We NEED at least to replace Ginsburg, unless we can find whatever blackmail material the Left has on Roberts and use it to leverage him and his pet minion our way...
platoonDaddy
03-29-19, 21:52
I don't think "Earl Warren 2.0" Roberts would have the balls to take this one... and we don't WANT him and his cock-remora Kavanaugh being the deciding votes on a SCOTUS that factoring them out is still 4-3 for the Other Team. We NEED at least to replace Ginsburg, unless we can find whatever blackmail material the Left has on Roberts and use it to leverage him and his pet minion our way...
What he said!
We (Californians) need to take advantage of the window of legality and buy a crap ton of standard capacity magazines.
Dr. Bullseye
03-29-19, 22:04
OMG, this is huge.
"In the meantime, Friday’s order prohibits California from enforcing its magazine restrictions, leaving its law-abiding residents safer and freer, at least for the time being."
Xavier Becerra got kicked in the balls.
I am in California and this is huge for us. Prohibiting enforcement means no more futzing around with issues of when you purchased the mags, if you have proof of purchase, the date of purchase and so on.
I was going to make a post about it, too. I'm reading the decision now, it's a good one.
Here are some of the money shots so far.
And this is from the citations and footnoes, same section:
You can read more here: http://michellawyers.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Duncan-2019-03-29-Order-Granting-Plaintiffs-MSJ.pdf
It's 81 pages of well-reasoned and thoroughly cited material.
Judge Benitez is one of us, but you can bet this case will get challenged to the 9th. Trump's been on a tear appointing new judges to the 9th, so there's a good chance that a three-judge panel might go in our favor. But you can still bet that the state will appeal again to en banc, where it historically wins these fights. If they lose again, I'm not sure they'd want to take it to SCOTUS where NY, NJ, MD, VT, and CO would have their bans threatened as well.
Surprisingly strong words
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
This is good. I’m happy for gun owners in California. Hopefully you all order a lot of D-60’s.
We couldn't even get an injunction here in NJ.
Allow me to be the cynical ass for a moment. Cali will request an En Banc hearing, the court will grant it and overturn the decision. NRA will petition to SCOTUS and they will decline. Law will go back to being enforced. Anyone wanna bet $5? lol
Good for them. Hope they can buy a ton of mags now.
Ho-lee sh!t!!!
There's hope for us yet
I'll believe it when I see it and CA shooters are mail ordering Glock and Pmags by the truck full.
Moose-Knuckle
03-30-19, 02:34
Next random mass shooting in CA in 3 . . . 2 . . .
ArmsUnlimited.com has started to sell to CA.
Averageman
03-30-19, 08:37
I bet Nancy Pelosi's dentures are chattering around in her head so fast she sounds like Maraca's.
I bet Nancy Pelosi's dentures are chattering around in her head so fast she sounds like Maraca's.
You just won the internet for the day. LOLOLOLOL
Max out them credit cards, yo
We couldn't even get an injunction here in NJ.
Allow me to be the cynical ass for a moment. Cali will request an En Banc hearing, the court will grant it and overturn the decision. NRA will petition to SCOTUS and they will decline. Law will go back to being enforced. Anyone wanna bet $5? lol
That's not cynicism. That's basically what I'm assumed would happen as soon as I heard about this.
In the meantime, Cali people, BUY! BUY! BUY!
We couldn't even get an injunction here in NJ.
Allow me to be the cynical ass for a moment. Cali will request an En Banc hearing, the court will grant it and overturn the decision. NRA will petition to SCOTUS and they will decline. Law will go back to being enforced. Anyone wanna bet $5? lol
Being an eternal optimist ( the magazine is half full ) and not from CA, I'll take that $5 bet. It's like the Judge says,, if they win this, they render the 2nd meaningless. We can win this.
I predict a feeding frenzy.
The 9th won’t let this stand.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
No they won't.. Pelosi, and Finestien have built their entire careers around gun control..You can bet they're making phone calls, and making deals right now..
There is a thread on TOS with a list of dealers selling/ shipping magazines to California. It stated that Bronwnells's and Palmetto State Armory will be shipping in a few days.
Good news for the non-exempt folks here in CA.
P.S. A couple of sites have crashed already from the traffic. Maybe 44mag will be resurrected. LOL
I certainly hope that this sticks for CA and moves up to SCOTUS for a final ruling on the matter for other mag cap limit states. Mag capacity limits are unconstitutional for sure not to mention just plain stupid, unenforceable and they don't stop folks from getting standard capacity magazines anyways.
I will celebrate in grand fashion the day CO mag cap laws are struck down.
Being an eternal optimist ( the magazine is half full ) and not from CA, I'll take that $5 bet. It's like the Judge says,, if they win this, they render the 2nd meaningless. We can win this.
We will have to remember this in a few months when the appeal goes through. You're on!
I agree with the judges ruling, but you know how the 9th is.
3ACR_Scout
03-30-19, 20:46
I don’t know much about CA laws, but I was under the impression that there was no grandfathering of “pre-ban” magazines. If that’s the case, that would seem to mean (to me) that if the ruling is overturned by a higher court, all the mags that people are rushing to buy during the injunction will be illegal again. Or am I misinformed about the grandfathering?
Posted 3 hours ago on social media...
https://scontent-dfw5-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/56381570_10155950615547097_2561101179132051456_n.png?_nc_cat=1&_nc_ht=scontent-dfw5-2.xx&oh=5a7b5944f11aba1d15cca10e660a5e56&oe=5D0F846F
I don’t know much about CA laws, but I was under the impression that there was no grandfathering of “pre-ban” magazines. If that’s the case, that would seem to mean (to me) that if the ruling is overturned by a higher court, all the mags that people are rushing to buy during the injunction will be illegal again. Or am I misinformed about the grandfathering?
Through a voter initiative and State legislation the "Grandfather" clause was recently eliminated. There is a large amount of information about the whole mess on Calguns
Link:
SB 23 - New Laws Pertaining to Large Capacity Magazines and Assault Weapons IB 12-17-1999 - California Department of Justice - CA.gov
P.S. Quiet (posting above) is an expert, he could fill-in you in better than I.
I don’t know much about CA laws, but I was under the impression that there was no grandfathering of “pre-ban” magazines. If that’s the case, that would seem to mean (to me) that if the ruling is overturned by a higher court, all the mags that people are rushing to buy during the injunction will be illegal again. Or am I misinformed about the grandfathering?
CA laws prohibited the making, importing, and transferring of 11+ round magazines after 01-01-2000.
If you obtained the 11+ round magazine before 2000 or legally obtained it after 1999, you are still legally able to possess it.
CA laws changed in 2016 and starting 07-01-2017, it would be illegal for non-exempt persons to possess 11+ round magazines.
Examples of an exempt person would be a LEO or a FFL with a CA DOJ large capacity magazine permit.
A lawsuit (Duncan v Becerra) was filed in 2017 challenging the change to the CA laws that made possession illegal.
Prior to 07-01-2017, an injunction was issued by the lower Federal Courts preventing enforcement of making possession illegal.
CA DOJ appealed this injunction to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which decided that the lower Federal Court was correct in issuing the injunction.
On 03-29-2019; the lower Federal Court ruled that CA's prohibition on making, importing, transferring, and possessing 11+ round magazines to be unconstitutional.
Speculations...
Are CA AG/DOJ will appeal the lower Federal Court ruling ASAP (next week?) and seek an emergency injunction to stop it for going into effect while they appeal the ruling to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Therefore...
Any 11+ round magazine obtained since the 03-29-2019 ruling to when an emergency injunction is issued by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, would have been legally obtained and considered "pre-ban".
What the Judge wrote...
IV. CONCLUSION
Magazines holding more than 10 rounds are “arms.” California Penal Code Section 32310, as amended by Proposition 63, burdens the core of the Second Amendment by criminalizing the acquisition and possession of these magazines that are commonly held by law-abiding citizens for defense of self, home, and state. The regulation is neither presumptively legal nor longstanding. The statute hits at the center of the Second Amendment and its burden is severe. When the simple test of Heller is applied, a test that persons of common intelligence can understand, the statute fails and is an unconstitutional abridgment. It criminalizes the otherwise lawful acquisition and possession of common magazines holding more than 10 rounds – magazines that lawabiding responsible citizens would choose for self-defense at home. It also fails the strict scrutiny test because the statute is not narrowly tailored – it is not tailored at all. Even under the more forgiving test of intermediate scrutiny, the statute fails because it is not a reasonable fit. It is not a reasonable fit because, among other things, it prohibits lawabiding concealed carry weapon permit holders and law-abiding U.S Armed Forces veterans from acquiring magazines and instead forces them to dispossess themselves of lawfully-owned gun magazines that hold more than 10 rounds or suffer criminal penalties. Finally, subsections (c) and (d) of § 32310 impose an unconstitutional taking without compensation upon Plaintiffs and all those who lawfully possess magazines able to hold more than 10 rounds.
Accordingly, based upon the law and the evidence, upon which there is no genuine issue, and for the reasons stated in this opinion, Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment is granted. California Penal Code § 32310 is hereby declared to be unconstitutional in its entirety and shall be enjoined.
Gonna say what I said on September 13, 2004..."it might be a very short window, start buying now as if it could end next week."
I was wrong back in 2004, but I don't regret a single purchase I made. I was so flush with things like magazines that when the Sandy Hook Panic buy started I was able to flip 100 pmags for more than 5 times what I paid for them and never even felt the loss. Also unloaded some redundant rifles that I spent less than $1000 on for more than twice that amount.
When the Sandy Hook ban never happened, I was able to drop those funds into more mags and more rifles. Thanks to Clinton and Obama ban efforts I was able to turn semi autos into some NFA stuff.
vicious_cb
03-31-19, 01:23
Magpul needs to do another "airlift" and flood california with pmags as a giant "**** you" to these liberal democrats.
https://twobirdsflyingpub.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/nl_headerimage_copmags_021.jpg
Kudos to Palmetto State Armory for being one of the first retailers to aggressively move on this opportunity for Californians! Every retailer and manufacturer that responds to this emergent need ought to be remembered as a friend of the 2A and gun owners.
Diamondback
03-31-19, 02:45
Kudos to Palmetto State Armory for being one of the first retailers to aggressively move on this opportunity for Californians! Every retailer and manufacturer that responds to this emergent need ought to be remembered as a friend of the 2A and gun owners.
Depends how fast PSA turns 'em around. Given how slow they have a rep for being... what happens if the Nutty Ninth Circus (Piss Be Upon Them) overturns with mags still in the mail?
Moose-Knuckle
03-31-19, 03:09
Saw an advert this evening on social media that PSA is running D&H USGI thirty rounders with Magpul followers for $6.99 in response to this. Rainier Arms is also shipping to CA.
And this is why you care about the courts more than anything... I have little doubt that the 9th will ruin this one, but until then it's game on for California. The thing that I have a tough time with is how on earth a higher court would disagree with the extremely cogent arguments laid out by the judge in this ruling, but far be it from me to expect them to make sense.
BrigandTwoFour
03-31-19, 08:21
And this is why you care about the courts more than anything... I have little doubt that the 9th will ruin this one, but until then it's game on for California. The thing that I have a tough time with is how on earth a higher court would disagree with the extremely cogent arguments laid out by the judge in this ruling, but far be it from me to expect them to make sense.
That's going to be the interesting thing to see.
Benitez basically called out the state for not providing any evidence if why their 10 round limit was appropriate. The California AG provided a Mother Jones article about mass shootings, but no actual research on the topic. On the other hand, the plaintiffs provided stacks of peer-reviewed documents about ddefensive gun uses.
The only way the 9th gets away with ignoring this is the "deference" argument, where the judiciary says that they defer to the legislature on the matter. That's worked in the past. But this time it was a ballot initiative voted on by the general public, so there was no legislature involved. In either case, Benitez called out the deference argument as inappropriate for a constitutional matter.
I actually think a a 3-judge panel for the 9th will agree with Benitez. What remains to be seen is the result of the en-banc challenge that follows. Mental gymnatics abound, for sure.
But we're talking 4-5 more years for that.
Therefore...
Any 11+ round magazine obtained since the 03-29-2019 ruling to when an emergency injunction is issued by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, would have been legally obtained and considered "pre-ban".
THIS is the explanation I was looking for. Solves everyone's problems. With this and the existing "repair and re-furbish" clause, we are all set.
Of course my preference would be to see the 10 round mag ban go to SCOTUS and be stricken down countrywide. Then I want to roll up the paper with the SCOTUS ruling on it and whap a whole bunch of idiot leftists upside the head with it.
I want to send this judge a thank you card and a case of his favorite candy or drink, or both!
Magpul needs to do another "airlift" and flood california with pmags as a giant "**** you" to these liberal democrats.
YESSSSSS!!!! Yes PLEASE!!!!
platoonDaddy
03-31-19, 11:57
The 9th will shortly have four judges appointed by Trump, lets hope the are strong 2A
The Senate is poised this week to consider two more conservative nominees selected by President Trump to sit on the left-leaning 9th Circuit Court of Appeals -- and the top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee isn't happy about it.
That's because the nominees, Ken Lee and Dan Collins, were picked without any input from either Dianne Feinstein or Kamala Harris, California's two Democrat senators. Traditionally, the White House seeks to obtain a so-called "blue slip," or approval, from a judicial nominee's two home-state senators before pressing on with their nominations.
But the Trump administration, which has successfully nominated several conservative judges to the 9th Circuit already, has pointedly disregarded that process as it continues its push to transform the appellate court that the president repeatedly has derided as hopelessly biased and "disgraceful."
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/feinstein-fumes-as-trump-administration-pushes-forward-with-9th-circuit-nominees-without-consulting-her
That's going to be the interesting thing to see.
Benitez basically called out the state for not providing any evidence if why their 10 round limit was appropriate. The California AG provided a Mother Jones article about mass shootings, but no actual research on the topic. On the other hand, the plaintiffs provided stacks of peer-reviewed documents about ddefensive gun uses.
The only way the 9th gets away with ignoring this is the "deference" argument, where the judiciary says that they defer to the legislature on the matter. That's worked in the past. But this time it was a ballot initiative voted on by the general public, so there was no legislature involved. In either case, Benitez called out the deference argument as inappropriate for a constitutional matter.
I actually think a a 3-judge panel for the 9th will agree with Benitez. What remains to be seen is the result of the en-banc challenge that follows. Mental gymnatics abound, for sure.
But we're talking 4-5 more years for that.
Thank you..I've seen alot of disscussion on this topic on other boards..Your post is the first one that lays out a logical explaination. If your line of thinking is correct, then it's possible that the ban can be overturned.. What the state would do if that happens is anybodys guess, but at a bare minium, they'll be scrambling to come up with something..
That's going to be the interesting thing to see.
Benitez basically called out the state for not providing any evidence if why their 10 round limit was appropriate. The California AG provided a Mother Jones article about mass shootings, but no actual research on the topic. On the other hand, the plaintiffs provided stacks of peer-reviewed documents about ddefensive gun uses.
The only way the 9th gets away with ignoring this is the "deference" argument, where the judiciary says that they defer to the legislature on the matter. That's worked in the past. But this time it was a ballot initiative voted on by the general public, so there was no legislature involved. In either case, Benitez called out the deference argument as inappropriate for a constitutional matter.
I actually think a a 3-judge panel for the 9th will agree with Benitez. What remains to be seen is the result of the en-banc challenge that follows. Mental gymnatics abound, for sure.
But we're talking 4-5 more years for that.
Thank you..I've seen alot of disscussion on this topic on other boards..Your post is the first one that lays out a logical explaination. If your line of thinking is correct, then it's possible that the ban can be overturned.. What the state would do if that happens is anybodys guess, but at a bare minium, they'll be scrambling to come up with something..
platoonDaddy
03-31-19, 11:58
The 9th will shortly have four judges appointed by Trump, lets hope the are strong 2A
The Senate is poised this week to consider two more conservative nominees selected by President Trump to sit on the left-leaning 9th Circuit Court of Appeals -- and the top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee isn't happy about it.
That's because the nominees, Ken Lee and Dan Collins, were picked without any input from either Dianne Feinstein or Kamala Harris, California's two Democrat senators. Traditionally, the White House seeks to obtain a so-called "blue slip," or approval, from a judicial nominee's two home-state senators before pressing on with their nominations.
But the Trump administration, which has successfully nominated several conservative judges to the 9th Circuit already, has pointedly disregarded that process as it continues its push to transform the appellate court that the president repeatedly has derided as hopelessly biased and "disgraceful."
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/feinstein-fumes-as-trump-administration-pushes-forward-with-9th-circuit-nominees-without-consulting-her
Forgot to add: The courts will be Trump's most lasting legacy. There are 29 jurist's on the 9th. The largest of any Circuit. With his latest appointments there will be 12 conservative judges. There is one more current vacancy to fill. Hopefully, others will open up before 2020. This is why we must have Trump re-elected.
BoringGuy45
03-31-19, 12:05
That's going to be the interesting thing to see.
Benitez basically called out the state for not providing any evidence if why their 10 round limit was appropriate. The California AG provided a Mother Jones article about mass shootings, but no actual research on the topic. On the other hand, the plaintiffs provided stacks of peer-reviewed documents about ddefensive gun uses.
The only way the 9th gets away with ignoring this is the "deference" argument, where the judiciary says that they defer to the legislature on the matter. That's worked in the past. But this time it was a ballot initiative voted on by the general public, so there was no legislature involved. In either case, Benitez called out the deference argument as inappropriate for a constitutional matter.
I actually think a a 3-judge panel for the 9th will agree with Benitez. What remains to be seen is the result of the en-banc challenge that follows. Mental gymnatics abound, for sure.
But we're talking 4-5 more years for that.
Whenever the en-banc challenge overturns this, they'll likely use one or all of the usual arguments:
1) The 2nd Amendment only protects guns and accessories designed for sporting purposes.
2) The Founding Fathers were only thinking about muskets when the Constitution was written and probably would have never even passed the 2nd Amendment if they knew assault rifles were going to become a thing.
3) The 2nd Amendment DOES protect the right to own 10+ magazines. But, public safety always trumps individual rights, and the government has the right to ignore any and all constitutional rights in the name of the greater good.
4) 10+ magazines are not protected by the 2nd Amendment because we ****ing said so and we don't owe you a goddamn explanation because we have law degrees and most of you inbred gun nuts don't.
BrigandTwoFour
03-31-19, 13:24
Whenever the en-banc challenge overturns this, they'll likely use one or all of the usual arguments:
1) The 2nd Amendment only protects guns and accessories designed for sporting purposes.
2) The Founding Fathers were only thinking about muskets when the Constitution was written and probably would have never even passed the 2nd Amendment if they knew assault rifles were going to become a thing.
3) The 2nd Amendment DOES protect the right to own 10+ magazines. But, public safety always trumps individual rights, and the government has the right to ignore any and all constitutional rights in the name of the greater good.
4) 10+ magazines are not protected by the 2nd Amendment because we ****ing said so and we don't owe you a goddamn explanation because we have law degrees and most of you inbred gun nuts don't.
That's the point, though. The 9th will certainly try to pull one of those tactics, but they'll have to work pretty hard to show why Benitez was wrong, especially since he quoted a lot of SCOTUS and other federal cases surrounding deference, public safety, and constitutional rights.
He's teeing this up for a SCOTUS case in 5-6 years.
I hope/think this will hit scotus.
By the time it does RBG will have been replaced. She may have the resilience of a cockroach, but eventually she will die.
Trump has five more years. For him to lose 2020 the dems need the best candidate they ever had. They have no one. Bloomberg could have a chance, but he refuses to run, I’d assume there are some skeletons in the closet and he knows better than to run.
So I look forward to mag bans being unconstitutional. Or... at least 30 rounds being considered ‘in common use’ and used as the threshold limit instead of ten.
Time shall tell but this is a great victory for all of us. And amazing for those in California who act fast.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/feinstein-fumes-as-trump-administration-pushes-forward-with-9th-circuit-nominees-without-consulting-her
Trump pushes ahead with 9th circuit nominees. Maybe this never gets past the 9th? Maybe trump gets his people in place?
So my question if the 9th circuit upholds the decision what does this mean for jusististions outside of the 9th circus?
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/feinstein-fumes-as-trump-administration-pushes-forward-with-9th-circuit-nominees-without-consulting-her
Trump pushes ahead with 9th circuit nominees. Maybe this never gets past the 9th? Maybe trump gets his people in place?
So my question if the 9th circuit upholds the decision what does this mean for jusististions outside of the 9th circus?
This is a good point. If the Dems know that when the 9th overturns this, that it will go to SCOTUS where there are likely to lose, they may make the decision to limit the "damage" to CA instead of going National with this ruling. This may either stop at the 9th, or never even go to the 9th if they know they are going to lose anyway.
Either way, you can bet they are pissed and trying to find new and ever more creative ways to ignore the Constitution and B of R, while F'ing over gun owners and other decent people.
Diamondback
03-31-19, 14:32
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/feinstein-fumes-as-trump-administration-pushes-forward-with-9th-circuit-nominees-without-consulting-her
Trump pushes ahead with 9th circuit nominees. Maybe this never gets past the 9th? Maybe trump gets his people in place?
So my question if the 9th circuit upholds the decision what does this mean for jusististions outside of the 9th circus?
Then you get a Circuit Split, which is one of the things that makes SCOTUS more likely to take a case.
3ACR_Scout
03-31-19, 15:17
Through a voter initiative and State legislation the "Grandfather" clause was recently eliminated. There is a large amount of information about the whole mess on Calguns
CA laws changed in 2016 and starting 07-01-2017, it would be illegal for non-exempt persons to possess 11+ round magazines.
Examples of an exempt person would be a LEO or a FFL with a CA DOJ large capacity magazine permit.
A lawsuit (Duncan v Becerra) was filed in 2017 challenging the change to the CA laws that made possession illegal.
Prior to 07-01-2017, an injunction was issued by the lower Federal Courts preventing enforcement of making possession illegal.
Thanks for the replies - that definitely clears it up for me. I noticed at least one article today that explains it better - that this was in response to the legislation that removed the granfathering, but I didn’t realize his has been going on since 2017.
I think it’s interesting that CNN has made no mention at all of this ruling, as far as I can tell. Normally they’re very quick to talk about gun legislation, but it’s as if they don’t want to publicize this one.
ArmsUnlimited.com has started to sell to CA.
PSA, too was one of the first companies to open up magazine sales to CA. I just checked their site and they are fresh out of D&H mags. Good on them and the other companies selling to CA. I hope they sell thousands of them.
Diamondback
03-31-19, 19:17
PSA, too was one of the first companies to open up magazine sales to CA. I just checked their site and they are fresh out of D&H mags. Good on them and the other companies selling to CA. I hope they sell thousandsmillions of them.
FIFY! :D What are Gov. Nuisance and AG Booger gonna do if California's so awash in full-caps people can hand 'em out like Halloween candy? :)
PSA, too was one of the first companies to open up magazine sales to CA. I just checked their site and they are fresh out of D&H mags. Good on them and the other companies selling to CA. I hope they sell thousands of them.
Still lots of Okay, PMag, 30-rds and D&H 20-rds mags available. Also be sure to checkout the 10 mag bundles, sometimes they are out of individual mags but still have the bundles available. Go CA gun owners!
FromMyColdDeadHand
03-31-19, 19:46
So what is the mag limit now in CA?
Saw an advert this evening on social media that PSA is running D&H USGI thirty rounders with Magpul followers for $6.99 in response to this. Rainier Arms is also shipping to CA.
Primary Arms announced today they will ship to CA.
So what is the mag limit now in CA?
Since Friday (03-29-19) and until CA AG gets an injunction to stay the ruling while he appeals to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals...
There is no capacity limit for ammunition feeding devices.
Semi-auto centerfire rifles with fixed magazines are limited to 10 rounds. [PC 30515(a)(2)]
Semi-auto pistols with fixed magazines are limited to 10 rounds. [PC 30515(a)(5)]
11+ round magazines can legally be utilized in DWs, RAWs, featureless semi-auto centerfire rifles, rimfire rifles, manually operated rifles, shotguns, manually operated pistols, and featureless semi-auto pistols.
platoonDaddy
03-31-19, 19:54
So what is the mag limit now in CA?
10 rounds
FromMyColdDeadHand
03-31-19, 20:41
Since Friday (03-29-19) and until CA AG gets an injunction to stay the ruling while he appeals to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals...
There is no capacity limit for ammunition feeding devices.
Semi-auto centerfire rifles with fixed magazines are limited to 10 rounds. [PC 30515(a)(2)]
Semi-auto pistols with fixed magazines are limited to 10 rounds. [PC 30515(a)(5)]
11+ round magazines can legally be utilized in DWs, RAWs, featureless semi-auto centerfire rifles, rimfire rifles, manually operated rifles, shotguns, manually operated pistols, and featureless semi-auto pistols.
10 rounds
??????
Gunmagwarehouse.com is now shipping any mag to CA as well, just got an email today. Good prices everywhere.
This is awesome. SUCK IT GUN-GRABBERS!
3ACR_Scout
03-31-19, 23:05
Gunmagwarehouse.com is now shipping any mag to CA as well, just got an email today. Good prices everywhere.
Discount code “GARANDTHUMB” gets you 5% off. From Garand Thumb, the YouTube guy who they sponsor. The website is apparently getting crushed bynorders right now. Running really slow.
Here also.
Ammunition Depot
https://www.ammunitiondepot.com/mags-home?utm_source=emarsys&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=%28AD%29Wk-of-03%2F25%2F19-Sun-Weekend-Specials-2019-04-01+06%3A00%3A00&sc_src=email_1539921&sc_lid=103743233&sc_uid=9EFoL2speO&sc_llid=90165&sc_eh=d5878b88bc77bc0a1
Just saw this on Fox News. "High-capacity gun magazines to remain legal in California, judge rules".
https://www.foxnews.com/us/judge-blocks-californias-high-capacity-ammunition-ban
Doc Safari
04-01-19, 09:32
Did someone think to send the news of this ruling to Diane Feinstein so she can have a stroke?
So now, if only Californians could acquire the ammo to put in their magazines.
So if the law changes, can they insist you destroy all your hi cap mags? Is that possible?
PB
So if the law changes, can they insist you destroy all your hi cap mags? Is that possible?
PB
Why not, the Feds did it with bump stocks.
FromMyColdDeadHand
04-01-19, 10:39
So if the law changes, can they insist you destroy all your hi cap mags? Is that possible?
PB
Basically that is what happened with 15 rnd magazines in Denver... At the state level, for the size of CA, there would be a lawsuit about 'takings'- but even if they pay you for them- they are bribing you with your own money- neat trick.
Brownells is now selling, picked up a D60 and put a D50 on backorder. Now to figure out how to hide them from the wife hahaha. I already got about 100 30 rounders so I don’t need any more really.
Not so fast.
The injunction only concerned Cal. Penal Code § 32310 (c) and (d), which prohibit simple possession.
Left untouched was (a) and (b) which talk about manufacturing, selling, possession to sell, importing into the state, transferring, etc.
How are Californians going to legally get these newly-legal magazines?
Where are you getting that?
"Plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment is granted. California Penal Code § 32310 is hereby declared to be unconstitutional in its entirety and shall be enjoined."
http://michellawyers.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Duncan-2019-03-29-Judgment-Granting-Plaintiffs-MSJ.pdf
Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
I'm going to run right over to Dick's Sporting Goods and buy a bunch of P-Mags!
Oh, wait...
Not so fast.
The injunction only concerned Cal. Penal Code § 32310 (c) and (d), which prohibit simple possession.
Left untouched was (a) and (b) which talk about manufacturing, selling, possession to sell, importing into the state, transferring, etc.
How are Californians going to legally get these newly-legal magazines?
Does it really matter? I’d hope folks have been smuggling them in regardless
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
If people can buy weed and marry other dudes then how can Normal uncucked mags even ever be wrong?
If people can buy weed and marry other dudes then how can Normal uncucked mags even ever be wrong?
Wait a tick....Magpul "high capacity" cannabis dispenser. We just need to invent nifty cylindrical brass tobacco canisters that hold pre measured amounts.
Congrats to everyone in CA. It has been a very long time since you had any good news. Take advantage of this window!
Moral of the story - JOIN THE NRA!!
Wait a tick....Magpul "high capacity" cannabis dispenser. We just need to invent nifty cylindrical brass tobacco canisters that hold pre measured amounts.
.350 Legend virgin brass should do nicely. We just need to re-market it on some hippy crafts site. Etsy? Maybe we can make a case that its a good consistent measuring tool for high class dope.
platoonDaddy
04-01-19, 19:25
Congrats to everyone in CA. It has been a very long time since you had any good news. Take advantage of this window!
Moral of the story - JOIN THE NRA!!
what he said!
Boy Scout Motto "Be Prepared"!
Stock up while the window is open.
what he said!
Boy Scout Motto "Be Prepared"!
Stock up while the window is open.
Lets never forget that politicians and unionized government as a blanket statement are a crime gang destroying our liberties from with in.
Lets never forget that politicians and unionized government as a blanket statement are a crime gang destroying our liberties from with in.
Bro give the sovereign crap a rest
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Not so fast.
The injunction only concerned Cal. Penal Code § 32310 (c) and (d), which prohibit simple possession.
Left untouched was (a) and (b) which talk about manufacturing, selling, possession to sell, importing into the state, transferring, etc.
How are Californians going to legally get these newly-legal magazines?
CA laws prohibited the making, importing, and transferring of 11+ round magazines after 01-01-2000.
If you obtained the 11+ round magazine before 2000 or legally obtained it after 1999, you are still legally able to possess it.
CA laws changed in 2016 and starting 07-01-2017, it would be illegal for non-exempt persons to possess 11+ round magazines.
Examples of an exempt person would be a LEO or a FFL with a CA DOJ large capacity magazine permit.
A lawsuit (Duncan v Becerra) was filed in 2017 challenging the change to the CA laws that made possession illegal.
Prior to 07-01-2017, an injunction was issued by the lower Federal Courts preventing enforcement of making possession illegal.
CA DOJ appealed this injunction to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which decided that the lower Federal Court was correct in issuing the injunction.
On 03-29-2019; the lower Federal Court ruled that CA's prohibition on making, importing, transferring, and possessing 11+ round magazines to be unconstitutional.
Even though the lawsuit was only about PC 32310(c)&(d), the Judge expanded it to include all of PC 32310.
In his ruling, the Judge declared the entirety of PC 32310 to be unconsitutional and enjoined.
On 04-01-2019, CA AG submitted a request for an emergency injunction to stay the 03-29-19 Ruling.
In that request, the CA AG states that since the Ruling, individuals in CA have been able to legally acquire new 11+ round magazines and that the need for an emergency injunction for the stay was to stop that.
On 04-01-2019, CA AG submitted a request for an emergency injunction to stay the 03-29-19 Ruling.
In that request, the CA AG states that since the Ruling, individuals in CA have been able to legally acquire new 11+ round magazines and that the need for an emergency injunction for the stay was to stop that.
Was the AGs request for an "emergency injunction" granted? Or are the floodgates still WIDE open?
Was the AGs request for an "emergency injunction" granted? Or are the floodgates still WIDE open?
Floodgates are still wide open.
The AG request was submitted on 04-01-19 and he asked for it to be granted before 04-05-19, with it being done idealy on 04-02-19.
However, because of how the Courts work, he had to submit the request to the Judge that made the ruling on 03-29-19.
It's not likley that the Judge will grant the request and the Judge could take up to two weeks to decide on it (need time to weigh the arguements/evidence for why the request should be granted).
As soon as it gets denied, it would then allow the AG to submit a request to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on the next business day the Federal Courts are open.
Floodgates are still wide open.
The AG request was submitted on 04-01-19 and he asked for it to be granted before 04-05-19, with it being done idealy on 04-02-19.
However, because of how the Courts work, he had to submit the request to the Judge that made the ruling on 03-29-19.
It's not likley that the Judge will grant the request and the Judge could take up to two weeks to decide on it (need time to weigh the arguements/evidence for why the request should be granted).
As soon as it gets denied, it would then allow the AG to submit a request to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on the next business day the Federal Courts are open.
Thank you. It seems that for once the slowness of government is working in our favor. Too bad the AG doesn't have to go to the DMV and wait in line with all the illegals to file his request.
So IF the 9th Circuit were to ultimately grant the injunction, the window of opportunity is about 3 weeks to a month I guess. Get it now while the getting is good.
If the 9th doesn’t grant the injunction, that’s a good sign that the ruling is likely to stand.
titsonritz
04-02-19, 11:17
The 9th may not be an issue for much longer.
Trump reshapes long-liberal 9th Circuit, as Republican-appointed judges gain seats on court (https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-reshapes-9th-circuit-gop-judges-near-majority)
Doc Safari
04-02-19, 11:18
The 9th may not be an issue for much longer.
Trump reshapes long-liberal 9th Circuit, as Republican-appointed judges gain seats on court (https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-reshapes-9th-circuit-gop-judges-near-majority)
Wow. That's like pulling down the statue of Lenin.
EDITED TO ADD: Here's what I hope. I hope this incident causes other states that are considering legislation to back off.
EDITED TO ADD: Here's what I hope. I hope this incident causes other states that are considering legislation to back off.
And states that have already passed this BS to realize that those days are numbered.
BoringGuy45
04-02-19, 12:41
And states that have already passed this BS to realize that those days are numbered.
I hope. The thing I see a lot of states doing, however, is simply refusing to comply with taking the law off their books.
platoonDaddy
04-02-19, 17:33
And states that have already passed this BS to realize that those days are numbered.
Hope so! We in MD have the same experience the west coast has with the 9th. the 4th isn't 2A friendly. Hopefully these two cases will wind their way to SCOUS
A divided Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals has just upheld the Maryland law banning certain rifles and magazines, in the matter of Kolbe v. Hogan.
The case centered on the Maryland Firearm Safety Act of 2013 (FSA), passed in the panic following the attack on the Sandy Hook elementary school. The law banned the possession of certain semiautomatic center fire rifles and pistols that it refers to as “assault weapons” as well as detachable magazines that have a capacity of more than ten rounds of ammunition. The law had been challenged by a bevy of plaintiffs arguing violation of the right to keep and bear arms protected by the Second Amendment and incorporated to the several states via the Fourteenth.
platoonDaddy
04-03-19, 09:18
PLAINTIFFS’ NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
http://michellawyers.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Duncan_Plaintiffs-Opposition-to-Defendants-Ex-Parte-Application-for-Temporary-Stay-of-the-Judgment_90.pdf
3ACR_Scout
04-03-19, 10:10
Hope so! We in MD have the same experience the west coast has with the 9th. the 4th isn't 2A friendly. Hopefully these two cases will wind their way to SCOUS
Having been born and raised in Maryland, but planning to never live there again, unfortunately, I kind of feel like the magazine part of MD’s ban is best left untouched and uncontested. Compared to other ban states, I think Marylanders are pretty fortunate that the politicians, for some reason, left the “possession” part out of the ban, allowing you guys to still drive into VA or PA and bring back as many standard mags as you want. Obviously it would be better to have no restrictions, but in my mind, it’s effectively like not having a mag ban at all. I’m kind of surprised that they haven’t gone back to close that “loophole.” My only guess is that they weren’t sure they could enforce any kind of grandfathering as far as mags go, and they figured the law as written would make it look like they were taking action but would sort of appease gun owners by leaving that “possession” opening.
FromMyColdDeadHand
04-03-19, 13:41
Having been born and raised in Maryland, but planning to never live there again, unfortunately, I kind of feel like the magazine part of MD’s ban is best left untouched and uncontested. Compared to other ban states, I think Marylanders are pretty fortunate that the politicians, for some reason, left the “possession” part out of the ban, allowing you guys to still drive into VA or PA and bring back as many standard mags as you want. Obviously it would be better to have no restrictions, but in my mind, it’s effectively like not having a mag ban at all. I’m kind of surprised that they haven’t gone back to close that “loophole.” My only guess is that they weren’t sure they could enforce any kind of grandfathering as far as mags go, and they figured the law as written would make it look like they were taking action but would sort of appease gun owners by leaving that “possession” opening.
The gun banners are getting smarter. What will happen is that they will go after AR pistols with braces and use that opportunity to tweak the mag law, probably with no grandfathering. Counting on their ignorance- like the evil features stupidity of the 94AWB, is not a viable long term strategy.
This reversal is great, but we live with really odd and restrictive laws in CA that make everything about gun ownership difficult. I already had standard cap mags and some of those I converted to 10, but can be converted back. So, I just just purchased some newer magazine designs for rifles and pistols.
Living in CA my whole life (in my sixties now), it is a shame to see what the regressive left has done to my state. I thought I would never leave, but we are leaving soon. My wife is younger so our last kid is about to go off to college. Then we are out of here.
I'm taking my home equity, my money, my guns, and all my regulated stuff and getting the hell out. We are leaving family and friends behind, but I can get out, so we are.
Seems like that is what Commifornia wants. A state populated with Techies and illegal immigrants who make minimum wage or are on welfare, and homeless people of course. The middle class is disappearing.
My wife and I are both techies. Management techies, but the new breed of young tech people, HR people, and a lot of the young management are complete tards and have no idea what made America great.
FYI for any M1 Carbine owners in CA, keep shooting.com still has Carbine mags in stock. Supposedly they make their own and superior to Korean. I just got a shipping notice so will have to wait and see what they are like. But other users recommend them.
I can’t believe I had just ordered a bunch of AR and Glock mags for the first time in a couple of years literally the day before this ruling that opened the buying floodgates. I was just revisiting my inventory and decided to add more so I don’t have to load mags at the range. I had zillions of 30s but low on 20s. My pre-panic radar must be getting pretty fine tuned! I’ve unknowingly topped off stocks just before each buying panic since 2007. Time but a Lotto ticket.
Okay Industries has just released the California Special Edition magazine.
56715
This reversal is great, but we live with really odd and restrictive laws in CA that make everything about gun ownership difficult. I already had standard cap mags and some of those I converted to 10, but can be converted back. So, I just just purchased some newer magazine designs for rifles and pistols.
Living in CA my whole life (in my sixties now), it is a shame to see what the regressive left has done to my state. I thought I would never leave, but we are leaving soon. My wife is younger so our last kid is about to go off to college. Then we are out of here.
I'm taking my home equity, my money, my guns, and all my regulated stuff and getting the hell out. We are leaving family and friends behind, but I can get out, so we are.
Seems like that is what Commifornia wants. A state populated with Techies and illegal immigrants who make minimum wage or are on welfare, and homeless people of course. The middle class is disappearing.
My wife and I are both techies. Management techies, but the new breed of young tech people, HR people, and a lot of the young management are complete tards and have no idea what made America great.
Same situation to a "T" with me. On our way to Wyoming
Seems like that is what Commifornia wants. A state populated with Techies and illegal immigrants who make minimum wage or are on welfare, and homeless people of course. The middle class is disappearing.
.
I don't think that is limited to the PRK, unfortunately.
Doc Safari
04-04-19, 13:53
DOH! I ordered some mags from Brownells literally a few hours before this story broke. A while ago it dawned on me I hadn't gotten a ship notification from them even though it's been a week. When I contacted them they confirmed that they are inundated with orders from California and are experencing long ship times.
Dang Californicators! LOL ! :jester:
Saw that on another site that Brownells has shipped over 350,000 mags so far to CA.
Doc Safari
04-04-19, 14:01
Been surfing some other sites just for kicks and giggles. Amazing how many are saying "Sold Out".
DOH! I ordered some mags from Brownells literally a few hours before this story broke. A while ago it dawned on me I hadn't gotten a ship notification from them even though it's been a week. When I contacted them they confirmed that they are inundated with orders from California and are experencing long ship times.
Dang Californicators! LOL ! :jester:
I ordered from them on Saturday. They have already shipped and are due the 10th.
Saw that on another site that Brownells has shipped over 350,000 mags so far to CA.
Wow... just one place too. I believe it.
Whiskey_Bravo
04-04-19, 15:16
I am sure these vendors are loving being able to move all those mags that have been stagnant in inventory for a while. I bet Magpul has gone into 24 hour production. Hell they need to make a special run of CAL mags just for the occasion.
I did a lot of ordering from different places (5 total) between Saturday and Monday. All have been shipped so far with arrival dates between the 6th and 10th.
Oh yeah, and melted a credit card in the process
It's like the liquor sales the day after prohibition ended...
One would expect more salvage operations to recover the magazines lost in boating accidents.
Diamondback
04-04-19, 16:45
One would expect more salvage operations to recover the magazines lost in boating accidents.
Magpul Boatlift? :)
They should totally do a California Commemorative limited-edition PMAG, assuming Benitez doesn't get stayed. It could be one hell of a fundraiser for CRPA/Calguns or SAF... and then do others every time another Ban gets overturned or repealed. :)
Then if we win at SCOTUS, maybe complete the set with a different PMAG for each state, territory etc...
ill trade someonr rn a army brown pmag m3 for a blended up missiom burrito from Califormia that i cam drink from a cup.
niw
Diamondback
04-04-19, 17:19
ill trade someonr rn a army brown pmag m3 for a blended up missiom burrito from Califormia that i cam drink from a cup.
niw
That *can* be arranged... post-digestion. :p
RobertTheTexan
04-04-19, 17:20
nuttn betterin drinkable B&C burritos fromma cup/ El cuppo de burrito
ill trade someonr rn a army brown pmag m3 for a blended up missiom burrito from Califormia that i cam drink from a cup.
niw
I’m hoping to be this drunk soon.
nuttn betterin drinkable B&C burritos fromma cup/ El cuppo de burrito
is that an offer?
can you get it to me lije rn?
why teleporters mot real?
is that an offer?
can you get it to me lije rn?
why teleporters mot real?
Bro, spellcheck is your friend. Let him help you. :jester:
Well, that didn’t take long. My guess is the original judge issued the stay to prevent the 9th from making instant criminals of those who ordered magazines after the initial ruling.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Diamondback
04-04-19, 19:49
So our CA teammates got 23 hours to get their orders in... Good luck, brothers!
From what I can tell, no stay has been issued yet and they are getting opposition to fight the stay. I got this from the NRA this afternoon:
On Tuesday, April 2, CRPA, with the support of NRA, filed a comprehensive opposition to California’s request seeking an immediate stay of enforcement of Friday’s decision in the case of Duncan v. Becerra, which found California’s restrictions against so-called “large-capacity” magazines unconstitutional and unenforceable.
This is the second opposition filed in response to California’s request for a stay. As reported yesterday, DOJ filed a request seeking an immediate stay while the court considered an additional request to stay the judgment while the case gets appealed.
The opposition illustrates how California has not shown a strong likelihood that it will succeed on the merits of its case, or that any of the other factors courts consider when deciding to issue a stay weigh in California’s favor. Palmetto State Armory also provided evidence to counter California’s arguments requesting a stay.
Stay Up-To-Date on the Latest Developments in Duncan v. Becerra
At this time, the Court has yet to issuing a ruling on California’s request to stay the enforcement of its judgment pending appeal. It is critical that California gun owners stay up-to-date on developments in Duncan to ensure they do not inadvertently violate California law should a stay be issued.
Diamondback
04-04-19, 20:11
From what I can tell, no stay has been issued yet and they are getting opposition to fight the stay. I got this from the NRA this afternoon:
On Tuesday, April 2, CRPA, with the support of NRA, filed a comprehensive opposition to California’s request seeking an immediate stay of enforcement of Friday’s decision in the case of Duncan v. Becerra, which found California’s restrictions against so-called “large-capacity” magazines unconstitutional and unenforceable.
Partial stay PDF'ed on the lawyer's site: http://michellawyers.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/2019-04-04-Order-Staying-in-Part-Judgment-Pending-Appeal.pdf
This is where the 5pm Friday time comes from.
Partial stay PDF'ed on the lawyer's site: http://michellawyers.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/2019-04-04-Order-Staying-in-Part-Judgment-Pending-Appeal.pdf
This is where the 5pm Friday time comes from.
Copy that.
This begs the question: Must they be bought and paid for before the stay, or must the CA resident take actual possession before the stay? I'm wondering what will happen if a stay is issued while all these millions of mags are in transit or backordered? Also wondering who on earth is not going to say they took possession during the legal period, however long that is?
Apparently the key wording in the stay is "..., or bought..." so CA gun owners have until 5pm Friday to purchase mags.
A neat byproduct is that all those mags stashed away that were outlawed in 2017, can now become legal since there is no proof they were not acquired during this one week frenzy by gift or personal cash purchase. So if 1 million mags are sold this week, there are probably 50 million or more that were not destroyed and kept for a rainy day.
Copy that.
This begs the question: Must they be bought and paid for before the stay, or must the CA resident take actual possession before the stay? I'm wondering what will happen if a stay is issued while all these millions of mags are in transit or backordered? Also wondering who on earth is not going to say they took possession during the legal period, however long that is?
From the order:
IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED that the permanent injunction
enjoining enforcement of California Penal Code § 32310 (a) and (b) shall remain in
effect for those persons and business entities who have manufactured, imported,
sold, or bought magazines able to hold more than 10 rounds between the entry of
this Court’s injunction on March 29, 2019 and 5:00 p.m., Friday, April 5, 2019.
From the order:
IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED that the permanent injunction
enjoining enforcement of California Penal Code § 32310 (a) and (b) shall remain in
effect for those persons and business entities who have manufactured, imported,
sold, or bought magazines able to hold more than 10 rounds between the entry of
this Court’s injunction on March 29, 2019 and 5:00 p.m., Friday, April 5, 2019.
Its looking like they are going to have a tough time putting this genie back in the bottle at this point, no matter what "they" say.
RobertTheTexan
04-04-19, 23:43
......
RobertTheTexan
04-04-19, 23:47
is that an offer?
can you get it to me lije rn?
why teleporters mot real?
On National Burrito Day all these dorks want to talk about is “ hi cap mags in Californistan.
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190405/63b9f124061454d26d86cc27c7097a48.jpg
But that bean and cheese from Taco Hell??? inna el cuppo?
Ohhhhhhh yeaaaaahhhh.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
is that an offer?
can you get it to me lije rn?
why teleporters mot real?
On National Burrito Day all these dorks want to talk about is “ hi cap mags in Californistan.
But that bean and cheese from Taco Hell??? inna el cuppo?
Ohhhhhhh yeaaaaahhhh.
Even in a drug-induced haze from dental surgery, Wingman stays on point. Even my sister, who has an annoying habit of posting what 'day' it is on facebook, missed National Burrito Day. I'll be letting her know.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.