In case you missed it, the courts upheld California’s ban on normal-capacity magazines.
I can’t say I’m surprised but I can say I’m disappointed. I was hoping that from a legislative and judicial standpoint we had turned a corner in regards to such things. Apparently not….although the Ninth Circus is the one most likely to go and do something completely wonky out of all the courts.
What’s it mean to me and you? Well, unless you live in California, not very much except as an indicator of how the political winds may be blowing.
However, it’s a good example of why you need to buy your Uncertain Goods when you can and in the quantities that you want. Unless I buy some previously not stockpiled thunderoty, I have plenty of mags for everything I shoot that needs a magazine.
If Biden can get his marbles together long enough to comprehend what his advisors and handlers are telling him, he’d start pushing for Assault Weapons Ban 1994: The Next Generation. Fortunately he’s just busy mispronouncing ‘omicron’ and sniffing women’s hair.
The nice thing about putting my magazine needs to rest years ago is that I no longer have to funnel resources in that direction. I can take my rapidly devaluing dollars and put them into other tangible goods….like food, fuel, fuel cans, radios, armour, gold, silver, medicines, clothes, shoes, and all the other little things that go to make up a prepared life.
One of the things that should be in your inventory is a good 3D printer. With the right 3d printer, a few spools of nylon filament and mail-order magazine springs that are an uncontrolled item, you can have as many 30 round magazines as you like.
I’m not sure this makes sense. It seems unlikely that the constituent component parts of magazines will not be controlled after a ban. But, lets say for a moment that they remain uncontrolled…then wouldn’t the magazine bodies be uncontrolled as well? And if the springs are uncontrolled and the bodies are uncontrolled, then you would simply assemble your own.And if they do decide to control magazine bodies to prevent people from making their own magazines, then it seems likely the magazine springs would be controlled as well.
CZ, you make an interesting point. The problem with the banning of parts like springs is that the springs being banned usually can be used in other things. How do you differentiate between a spring used in a manufacturing process versus one used in a magazine?
Here’s an example of how banning parts can go wrong.
A while back in Canada there was a push by the government of the day to register all firearms. One loophole that came to light was that the lack of a frame in percussion and flintlock firearms which, under the criminal code is what a firearm is. The answer that the RCMP came up with was to put serial numbers on the breach plugs of these firearms. It was pointed out that all breach plugs are lag bolts and the RCMP would have to go to every hardware store and put serial numbers on all the lag bolts.
This is puzzling. The 9th Circut was the one court that Trump managed to change the complexion of. Last year the court decided that the ban on high capacity mags was unconstitutional. Now we’re here again. Wonder what happened.
An interesting fact on the 9th Circus Court of Appeals is the largest of all the federal courts. It covers Commiefornia, Washington, Oregon, part of Nevada, Hawaii and Alaska. It has 27 judges assigned to it so it takes 18 for a judicial quorum.
Before Trump it was the most overturned court in the country. Since this is the first I’ve heard about this I’ll have to find the opinion in order to figure out what the basis for the descion was.
While I haven’t seen the opinion either, I know that usually cases are heard by a small number of judges drawn randomly, sometimes as few as 3, so with that many judges there could still be a majority of liberals on a case.
No, Trump didn’t. He came close, but fell two judges short of flipping it to majority conservative, and returning the western U.S. to membership in a constitutional republic.
The basis for this decision is there’s still a commie majority on it.
I’m just thankful so far Biden has been more pro 2A than Trump with his bumpstock ban.
Okay. Did some checking. The original descion on the Mag ban was rendered by two Judges in the Federal District Court. This was then appealed to the 9th Circus Court of Appeals. Oddly the descion was given by a panel of 7 judges. The ban was reinstated by a vote of 5-2.
Next stop for this is most likely the SCOTUS.
Right now they are embroiled in the fight to overturn Roe. And if it isn’t overturned now it never will be. Justice Thomas came as close to my argument on Roe and Gay marriage. The Federal courts way overstepped their judicial boundaries by taking those two cases. Neither the definition of marriage nor abortion are mentioned in the Constitution. Therefore those are subjects that devolve to the tenth amendment. Both are states issues and the Federal courts nor Congress have any say at all. Strictly speaking.
This may be only temporary.
Whether it gets to SCOTUS is an open question, and far from a settled issue at this point.
I think body armor is next on the ban list. You’ll need some sort of license to possess it, and wearing it will be defacto evidence of premeditation if you are charged with a crime subsequent to any incident…
FWIW, the crotch guard flap from issue armor in larger sizes is a pretty good fit for a kid’s back pack or book bag, and not a bad soft ‘plate’ for an adult carrier. They go cheap because no one worries too much about covering the crotch… They fit in the camelbak pouch in many small packs too. Hard to do a comparison on ratings but anything is better than nothing.
n
When a judicial decision is appealed from a Federal District Court to the 9th Circuit, a three- judge panel is selected to hear the case. Memory fails me here. I cannot remember if the the three judges are selected on a round robin, rotational basis or by individual random selection. In any event, it is like Forrest Gump’s box of chocolates, “You never know what you are going to get.”
The three-judge panel, composed of two Republican appointees and one Democrat appointee, upheld the District Court judge’s ruling in which the District Judge ruled that the 10-round magazine limitation was unconstitutional.
The State of California then requested an “en banc” ruling. It was granted. What this meant was that 11 judges were selected randomly from the judges in the 9th Circuit, and they would determine whether to uphold or to overrrule the District Court judge’s original ruling.
While Trump’s appointmens of new judges greatly changed the liberal vs. conservative composition of the 9th Circuit (although still with a Democrat majority), It is my understanding that the selection of the judges who participated in the en banc review included a strong majority of Democrat-appointed judges. The “word on the street” here was not to expect a pro-gun rights victory.
Frankly, no matter who won at the appellate level, neither side would simply pack up their marbles and go home. This case will not be resolved until either the Supreme Court decides to hear it, to refuse to hear it, or otherwise renders a decision in another case that becomes “the law of the land” and thereby trumps it.
Currently, there are two cases before the Supreme Court that could be game changers. A New York case was argued in the last two weeks and it pertains to the right to carry concealed. A New Jersey case pertains to magazine capacity limitations.
It is my understanding that, if appealed (and be assured that it will be), the California case could be consolidated with the New Jersey case. In any event, the New Jersey case has a “head start” and the results there could render the California case moot, given that the ruling in the New Jersey case will become the “law of the land.”
Until some further ruling takes place, the possession of 10+ round magazines permitted by the Federal District Court judge remains in force and effect.
What is the definition of “is”? All this lawyer nonsense doesn’t matter, just as voting doesn’t matter. They do as they wish. If you can’t buy enough magazines for law changes to never matter when you first buy for prized plastic poodle shooter, you probably have no business buying the weapon in he first place. The same should go for ammo. And the only reason we can still buy any is they want one side armed so as to start the Boogaloo and give them an excuse to triage the food supply. Plan accordingly.
Refresh my memory… does the shiny side face your scalp or does the shiny side face the outside?
The original California prohibition grandfathered magazines purchased before the ban went into effect. Owners could not sell them in-state, of course. Purchasing new ones was illegal, of course. So when buying them suddenly WASN’T illegal, California gun owners tied up the standard mag market for a good two weeks as every last one was ordered and backordered before Benitez ordered temporary stays on his own rulings. I’m pretty sure some people bought mags for guns they don’t even own in anticipation of someday buying one and being able to use it as intended.
So, while we can’t buy them now, there are so many purchased legally that they are visible on ranges and mostly ignored.
One thing the COS project wants to do after term limits for Congress is send an amendment to the stares that would give Congress a year to respond to any court ruling by passing legislation to counter it. .
The courts TOOK judicial review. Nothing was passed by Congress. Who created the Federal courts. In Marbry be a Madison the SCOTUS took the right for themselves.
People who think the high Court is a panacea or remedy to problems have no clue about the court. Many of the landmark cases were total disasters. Like Korematsu. Dress Scott or Plesey vrsFerguson. The decision on the Unfordable don’t care Act was ridiculous. The bill was unlawful on many levels. And it violated half a dozen areas of the Bill of Rights. This crap will continue untill a strong Congress takes back their exclusive rights to legislate. That was abdicated in the 30s. Now unelected bureaucrats write most of the laws after Lobbyists line their pockets. Those are referred to as regulations.
The Constitution isn’t broken. It’s been ignored by successive Congresses and thousands of bureaucrats. Today 94% of all legislation passed by Congress doesn’t pass Constitutional review.