SACRAMENTO, CA — A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on Friday that California’s ban on high-capacity magazines was unconstitutional and violates the right to keep and bear arms.
Previously, the magazine ban outlined in Proposition 63 prohibited ownership and use of magazines holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition.
According to the Associated Press, Appellate Judge Kenneth Lee noted that the law was passed “in the wake of heart-wrenching and highly publicized mass shootings,” but reiterated that that does not justify a ban that “is so sweeping that half of all magazines in America are now unlawful to own in California.”
Additionally, according to Courthouse News Service, U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez stated that “nothing in the Second Amendment makes lethality a factor to consider because a gun’s lethality, or dangerousness, is assumed.” He added that “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.”
California Rifle & Pistol Association called Friday’s decision “a huge success” for gun owners “and the right to choose to own a firearm to defend your family…”
Further, this ruling has national implications, as it sets a precedent for other states that have similar restrictions (though it currently only applies to western states under the 9th Circuit’s jurisdiction).
Firearm owners in California should stay tuned for updates about when they can actually buy high-capacity magazines. While this is a big success, the law still needs to work through further legal proceedings, which may take a while to unfold.
Get notified when 9mm, .223 Rem., and Other Popular Calibers are in Stock & Ready to Ship
Liberty means you risk a bit to be free the alternative is Stalin’s USSR. The anti gun thugs want to own us and control our lives from birth to death. The instant gun check at the federal level is enough. Ammo cannot be fired without a gun and does not need to be checked with your name in some data base so the thugs can come to steal your liberty like they did in New Zealand or the UK to name two nations or are trying to do in California.
@vincent. Why regulate ammo at all? Firearms are already heavily regulated. If one may legally own a firearm, then ammunition should not be regulated in any way.
All good law must meet certain criteria. I dont think something l like you have in mind would be enforceable, apply to everyone, or make a difference to the common good.
There are 10s of thousands of laws on the books regarding firearms already. There really shouldnt be any. We already have good laws against harming others, murder, robbery, etc.
This all comes about when people abdicate personal responsibility. It is NOT the inanimate object that commits crimes. It is the person. Period.
Hi Clifffalling, All good points, but I was not try to suggest that we have controls on ammo purchases, but rather if this who passed the ridiculous law that you cannot buy ammo online wanted a way to ‘protect’ and wanted some controls so that CA residents could buy online, that some system could probably be implemented. I object completely that they got away with passing a law where CA residents are not allowed to buy ammo online. This one should be taken to court as well!
Vincent (08-24-2020)
In this case only, what’s good for California is good for New Jersey.
Also says something like ” to maintain a well regulated militia” – now days people don’t know that is old English for “effective”. It has to be military grade training and equipment, in other words. This decision is the only way to interpret the Constitution. Kudos to the 9th Circuit for doing their job and protecting the Constitutional rights of ALL Americans!
The ruling in CA is great news for people to protect their families & property that will help lower crime rates. Lowlife criminals and George Soros paid agitators are all cowards going after low hanging fruit. Pushing back on the commies in court keeps America safer for nice folks trying to take care of their loved ones and keeping America Great Again WWG1WGA.
“Shall not be infringed” Vincent. That means no hoops to jump through. Felons know who they are are we should not bear their burdens.
While I am surprised to hear this, it seems to me to be more important that California resident can buy ammo online, which is usually far less expensive, and gives the customer much wider choices, and it impacts a lot more gun owners. So, I wish that they would look at CA’s ban on ordering ammo online. A system could be implemented nationwide that is similar to CA’s for buying ammo so that not just anyone can buy online – meaning no convicted felons, the mentally unsafe, etc.
Vincent (08-20-2020)