California cannot ban gun owners from having detachable magazines that hold more than 10 rounds, a federal judge ruled Friday.

The decision from U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez won’t take effect immediately. California Attorney General Rob Bonta, a Democrat, has already filed a notice to appeal the ruling. The ban is likely to remain in effect while the case is still pending.

This is the second time Benitez has struck down California’s law banning certain types of magazines. The first time he struck it down — way back in 2017 — an appeals court ended up reversing his decision.

  • shalafi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    2 years ago

    Lots of great comments and debate here. Love it. But let me address mag bans specifically. They’re a silly feel-good measure, at best.

    If you tell me a capacity ban will save lives, I have to ask, have you ever swapped a magazine, of any sort? Hell, I’m actually more on target with my 10-round AR mags. Give’s me 4 seconds to breathe, reset myself. The standard 30-round mag is physically and mentally wearing.

    If for no other reason, the idea is childish thinking. Who believes the bad guys, the people they wish to restrict, will just shrug their shoulders and say, “OK.”?

    Besides, many LEOs, even sheriffs, have said they won’t enforce such a ban. Well… probably not on white people. (Oh look, another racist gun law. Who knew?)

    And even if one still thinks they’re a great idea, how will you stop me from getting one from another state? It’s a box with a spring in it, they’re stupid cheap and plentiful. LOL, in the runup to the Oregan ban there were 100 people posting pics of their full crates in my liberal gun owners’ group.

    And perhaps worst of all, this annoys single-issue voters that would otherwise vote Democrat and gives ammo (heh) to conservatives. “SEE! They coming for your guns!” This hill worth dying on to lose elections to the GOP?

    • Jeremy [Iowa]@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 years ago

      This hill worth dying on to lose elections to the GOP?

      It has been for quite a few elections now - it would cost blue team nothing to pivot and yet they refuse to do so.

    • uglyduckling81@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      It’s a short sighted argument to say baddies don’t follow the rules so your only restricting honest people.

      In Australia assault rifles and automatics are just outright banned. You need a licence to own any type of gun, which takes 6 months waiting for background checks to be done. Guns must be kept in Safes etc.

      So whilst a baddie might want to get an assault rifle and go on a kill rampage he can’t. There just aren’t any around. You can’t break in to a house and steal one.

      Can organised crime get them? Sure. But that’s not what this is trying to stop. It’s preventing the impulsive bat shit crazy person going on a rampage.

      It absolutely helps, as proven by Australias lack of mass shootings.

      People who want to go hunting still can.

  • not_that_guy05@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    2 years ago

    Law should be struck down.

    • magazines are easy to return to 30/30 from a 10/30
    • only affects law abiding citizens while criminals ignore the law
    • background checks and waiting period should be automatic in the US to purchase. Period.
    • Guns should be registered.

    As a gun owner I in my opinion think that we should have sensible laws for firearms. Do we need fully auto firearms? No not really. Are semi auto rifles a great tool for people in the country side? Sure I understand they have different dangers compare to city folks. For people that saw they should charge high taxes to own guns. Look at Mexico it ain’t helping no one and makes it that the wealthy folks can afford firearms.

    Oh and if we do register firearms and your gun is found in the black market without you notifying that your firearm was stolen that should be a red flag. It’s an easy market to sell firearms when you buy from lax law states and they end up in Mexico.

    Lastly I know this is a stretch, but the US should be checking vehicles going to Mexico. Interesting that we only check coming back but not going. Firearms trafficking would be significantly reduced if we started checking.

    Last last thing, if you have kids and own a firearm and don’t secure it, a big fuck you. Putting kids in danger, you fuckin cucks.

    • Blinx615@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      2 years ago

      only affects law abiding citizens while criminals ignore the law

      We shouldn’t have laws because criminals won’t follow them

    • DaBabyAteMaDingo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      Proud gun owner here. I’d like to see a more proactive approach to gun registration and some sort of yearly inspections for “assault rifles” - just to appease the ones that don’t know anything about guns. Kinda like how you would get “tags” on a car, if that makes sense.

      However, we should be able to own fully automatic firearms and silencers/suppressors, muzzle breaks and other “evil” attachments and modifications if the previously mentioned system is in place. The more capable and dangerous the machine, the more tests and certifications you’ll need to legally own them. AND we should have special firing ranges for these types of guns. Obviously this is not a realistic goal I’m *in this current system but I just want a MP5 :'(

      What would you say to something like this?

      • not_that_guy05@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        I’m all for it. Serial# attachment and register it to the person that will own it. Again if that attachment is found in the black market or with someone that is not suppose to have it, red flag and background check the original owner. We are more reactionary than preventives which is counterproductive when it comes to safety.

        You bought a firearm? Show that you can handle it and clear it responsively. Don’t know how to handle one? Go take a day at a firing range and familiarize yourself and get certified. This will also remove any doubt of “mishandling” discharge.

        • DaBabyAteMaDingo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          100% agree. I’ve always said the cringiest thing about me is my love of guns. It truly is fashion accessories for men like purses lol

  • ShittyRedditWasBetter@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    2 years ago

    Shocking! Another dumb ineffective gun law that was clearly never going to stand is shot down.

    Really good use of political capital and money.

    • shalafi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      I find that neither side of the spectrum has any notion of political capital. They simply say, “I’m right and that’s all that counts!”

      Great example, the GOP is in the “find out” stage of “fucking around” with abortion.

    • PopcornTin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      2 years ago

      True, but if we keep trying, we will eventually get a judge that decides the case based on feelings instead of that outdated paper.

        • grayman@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          It will take a left leaning supreme court, but that’s exactly what will happen. If a future scotus decides to override Bruen and Heller, we’re back to square one.

      • shalafi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 years ago

        Tell us how a capacity ban makes us safer and should be upheld by the courts. Caveat: I’m a liberal and a gun owner who is well versed in firearms. I doubt you’ll like my rebuttals, but I always hope to learn something new by these discussions.

  • sudo22@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    2 years ago

    Before anyone tries to argue if the 2A covers bullet capacity, let me introduce you to the chambers gun

    Presented to the founding father’s in 1792 by its civilian inventor. 224 round capacity. Fully automatic.

    The founding father’s not only KNEW about high cap autos, they are even confirmed to have seen in action this fully automatic ultra high capacity gun, and they had absolutely no problem with a civilian owning and making them.

  • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    21
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    There’s no right to magazine sizes. They have a right to guns. Give ‘em a bolt action with a 3+1 magazine. Still have a gun, right?

  • blazera@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    2 years ago

    You can fire the next bullet in a mag magnitudes faster than you can fire the first bullet in the next mag. Not only drastically lowering the rate a gunman can kill, but dissuading it in the first place

  • Mdotaut801@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    So many “proud gun owner here.” So lame. People and their guns are so fucking paranoid and pathetic. Sold my handgun a lloooooooooong time ago when I realized that I have NEVER been in a position to need one.

    • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      I haven’t been in a position to need a gun for about 15 years, since I moved out of the poor areas I grew up in. I don’t own any guns and have no intention of buying one.

      But I support the rights of gun owners. The 2nd amendment is very clear. Just because I don’t want one, doesn’t mean I can demand other people give theirs up. Or shame them for wanting the government to respect their rights.

    • atticus88th@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      2 years ago

      You are so cool. There are a lot of people who have absolutely no business ever owning a gun and the less in hands of uneducated, untrained and ignorant individuals the better.

  • thewut@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 years ago

    They should should say that the lowers is the bullet because it’s lowered into a series of pipes to the gun. We shouldn’t say how far a pipe can reach or how much straw someone can have in their hat.

      • thewut@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        My AR-15 wrote it…it may have some character limit that prevents it from being useful for human to human understanding. I will have to have it looked at by a computer professional to see what they say.

  • Coach@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    29
    ·
    2 years ago

    Simple solution: tax the ever-loving fuck out of bullets. $1000 per. Call it a “true cost adjustment.”

      • Coach@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        2 years ago

        Better than the “profiteering off of the death of kids” community.

    • BaldProphet@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 years ago

      Ah yes, let’s just arbitrarily throw out the Bill of Rights and make it so that only rich people can access tools with which to protect themselves.

    • Bakkoda@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      2 years ago

      What a brilliantly uneducated idea. Thanks for turning my hunting season into a 3k dollar minimum adventure instead of a cheap way for me to put food on my table.

        • RaoulDook@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          We do during bow season, and then we hunt with rifles during rifle season. It’s the best way to get more deer meat in the freezer.

    • Draupnir@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      2 years ago

      Says the guy who is vastly unaware of how many responsibly armed citizens they cross paths with on a daily basis, and who have demonstrably prevented mass shootings. You have no idea the hidden safety net you live under and yet you want it destroyed because of the few bad actors.

      • Coach@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        2 years ago

        Yup. Yes. A few bad actors spoiled it for the rest of you. Waa waa waa…grow up. Y’all can’t figure out if guns are a hobby or a necessity, but you seem to always fall back on both points pretty quickly. It’s sad that your “interests” seem to threaten our very existence, yet you feel like you have some inalienable right to kill others. It’s extremely sad and disappointing. I suggest you grow up and find other ways to entertain yourself.

      • Coach@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        2 years ago

        And just in case you’re looking for your “good guys with a gun,” they’re all standing outside of a school, waiting and shitting their pants. It’s pathetic.