HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » 9th Circuit Court Panel E...

Fri Aug 14, 2020, 03:06 PM

9th Circuit Court Panel Ends California Ban On High-Capacity Magazines

Source: CBS San Francisco

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.”



Read more: https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2020/08/14/9th-c



Regarding Appellate Judge Kenneth Lee (from Wikipedia):

On October 10, 2018, President Trump announced his intent to nominate Lee to serve as a United States Circuit Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.[5] Both California Senators Dianne Feinstein and Kamala Harris announced their opposition to his nomination.[9] On November 13, 2018, his nomination was sent to the Senate. President Trump nominated Lee to the seat vacated by Judge Stephen Reinhardt, who died on March 29, 2018.

47 replies, 3517 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 47 replies Author Time Post
Reply 9th Circuit Court Panel Ends California Ban On High-Capacity Magazines (Original post)
C Moon Aug 14 OP
Aristus Aug 14 #1
Calista241 Aug 14 #21
bucolic_frolic Aug 14 #2
Calista241 Aug 14 #24
Blues Heron Aug 14 #3
zipplewrath Aug 14 #4
Evolve Dammit Aug 14 #5
Mr.Bill Aug 14 #6
Polybius Aug 15 #32
Mr.Bill Aug 15 #40
Polybius Aug 15 #42
Mr.Bill Aug 15 #43
Polybius Aug 15 #44
yaesu Aug 14 #7
Dial H For Hero Aug 14 #8
C Moon Aug 14 #10
yaesu Aug 14 #11
Dial H For Hero Aug 14 #14
yaesu Aug 14 #15
cstanleytech Aug 14 #12
cstanleytech Aug 14 #9
Thunderbeast Aug 14 #17
cstanleytech Aug 14 #18
ansible Aug 14 #30
cstanleytech Aug 15 #31
Polybius Aug 15 #33
cstanleytech Aug 15 #35
Polybius Aug 15 #41
Tom Yossarian Joad Aug 14 #13
Thunderbeast Aug 14 #19
Calista241 Aug 14 #26
Name removed Aug 15 #37
ananda Aug 14 #16
JustABozoOnThisBus Aug 14 #22
Name removed Aug 15 #39
Progressive Jones Aug 14 #20
msongs Aug 14 #23
rickyhall Aug 14 #25
Dial H For Hero Aug 14 #27
PoliticAverse Aug 14 #28
Polybius Aug 15 #34
Dial H For Hero Aug 14 #29
Snoopy 7 Aug 15 #36
Devil Child Aug 15 #38
Turbineguy Aug 15 #45
friendly_iconoclast Aug 16 #46
Dial H For Hero Aug 16 #47

Response to C Moon (Original post)

Fri Aug 14, 2020, 03:11 PM

1. Yeah, because 'self-defense' is impossible without high-capacity magazines...



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aristus (Reply #1)

Fri Aug 14, 2020, 04:34 PM

21. A comparison is if they banned basketballs that were inflated to over 7.5 psi.

Despite that being the recommended air pressure rules recommended by the manufacturers and required by the NBA. Now the basketball doesn't bounce the way it's supposed to, it's harder to use, and it pisses everyone off.

Basically they took something normal, outlawed it, and changed how everyone in the state uses their legally purchased items. Something like 97% of guns manufactured in the last 80 years ran afoul of this high capacity ban.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to C Moon (Original post)

Fri Aug 14, 2020, 03:11 PM

2. Specious connection between 2A and quantity

When there are 500 rounds per clip, they'll want 600 to compete. Escalation forever. All for a "well-regulated militia" to defend the colonies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bucolic_frolic (Reply #2)

Fri Aug 14, 2020, 04:52 PM

24. A 500 round magazine would weigh over 40 lbs when loaded, and doesn't include the

weight of the rifle itself. Even with a light weight round like the 5.56 nato bullet.

I don't think anyone will ever have to worry about a 500 round magazine though. Magazines are operated by springs, and no spring technology exists that could reliably feed 500 rounds into a handheld rifle, or even a portable crew served machine gun. There's a reason the 100 round magazines are horribly inefficient and prone to misfeeds.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to C Moon (Original post)

Fri Aug 14, 2020, 03:11 PM

3. Fucking humpers - what a plague they are.

the core of the 2A is an armed militia, not individual armed self defense. We need to take back the country from these sick humpers and their allies on the courts

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to C Moon (Original post)

Fri Aug 14, 2020, 03:19 PM

4. Heller

Heller went a long way towards saying that in fact these kinds of restrictions were valid. I'm not sure these three are well based in law. I wonder what the full court would say.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to C Moon (Original post)

Fri Aug 14, 2020, 03:20 PM

5. Such bullshit. The 2nd has been perverted. It was about muskets and a "well regulated" militia.

Apples and fucking oranges to today. Draw a line at hunting rifles, shotguns, etc. Plenty lethal and certainly enough for "home defense" or whatever else you're worried about?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to C Moon (Original post)

Fri Aug 14, 2020, 03:36 PM

6. If the full court hears this

it will be reversed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mr.Bill (Reply #6)

Sat Aug 15, 2020, 01:41 AM

32. The US Supreme Court?

You have a lot more confidence in them than I do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Polybius (Reply #32)

Sat Aug 15, 2020, 11:46 AM

40. No, the full 9th Circuit Court.

This was just a three judge panel from the full 9th Circuit, led by a Trump appointee. The Attorney General has the option of asking the full court to hear the case and make a decision, which could reverse this one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mr.Bill (Reply #40)

Sat Aug 15, 2020, 01:12 PM

42. Is there a time limit on when the AG can appeal?

I know Barr would never do it, but the next one will.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Polybius (Reply #42)

Sat Aug 15, 2020, 01:15 PM

43. I'm talking about the California AG, not federal.

And I imagine there would be some time limit, but I don't know what it is exactly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mr.Bill (Reply #43)

Sat Aug 15, 2020, 01:21 PM

44. Ahh gotcha

I'd imagine the CA AG will get on that right away. But then it could eventually go to the US SC.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to C Moon (Original post)

Fri Aug 14, 2020, 03:38 PM

7. this is nuts, same ban held country wide for 10 years before it expired. Wonder how many are tRump

appointed?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yaesu (Reply #7)

Fri Aug 14, 2020, 03:44 PM

8. Not quite the same law. The Assault Weapon Ban of 1994-2004 banned the manufacture of high capacity

magazines for civilian use, but ones previously purchased could still be owned or sold to other individuals.

In contrast, the California law is more strict. There is no grandfathering clause, and possesing a high capacity magazine, even if it was legally purchased prior to the law's enactment, is a felony.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dial H For Hero (Reply #8)

Fri Aug 14, 2020, 03:50 PM

10. Thanks for clearing that up, Dial H. Didn't know that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dial H For Hero (Reply #8)

Fri Aug 14, 2020, 03:50 PM

11. yep, you're right, I remember that individuals could still buy and sell but was an importer,

manu ban.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yaesu (Reply #11)

Fri Aug 14, 2020, 04:01 PM

14. Durintg the ban, I remember seeing 17 round Glock magazines that used to sell for $15 go for $150(!)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dial H For Hero (Reply #14)

Fri Aug 14, 2020, 04:09 PM

15. oh man, the market gets crazy when supply doesn't keep up with demand. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yaesu (Reply #7)

Fri Aug 14, 2020, 03:50 PM

12. No, it's simply the Constitution.

If people truly want the gun issue solved then they need to amend the Constitution because otherwise a court at some future time can toss the law out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to C Moon (Original post)

Fri Aug 14, 2020, 03:47 PM

9. I have said it before and I will say it again the only way

anything can be done about the gun issue is via an amendment to the Constitution. Otherwise the courts can throw any such laws that try to address it out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cstanleytech (Reply #9)

Fri Aug 14, 2020, 04:28 PM

17. A Constitutional Amendment is a very heavy lift.

The Constitution is structured at it's core to advantage small rural states. Until we have sweeping changes in political power at ALL levels of government, repealing or re-writing 2A is not going to happen.

The absolute right to own unlimited arms, however, can someday be overturned by SCOTUS. The HELLER decision which enshrined the current interpretation of the 2A was decided in a 5-4 court vote....hardly a clear call. John Paul Stevens' decent in the case lays out a more reasonable interpretation that emphasizes the context of a "well regulated militia" in the declaration of gun rights. Never has awkward punctuation (in second amendment syntax) had such devastating impact on a society!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thunderbeast (Reply #17)

Fri Aug 14, 2020, 04:30 PM

18. I know but otherwise any law that is passed will be at the mercy of a future court challenge.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cstanleytech (Reply #9)

Fri Aug 14, 2020, 11:38 PM

30. That's a good way to start a civil war

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ansible (Reply #30)

Sat Aug 15, 2020, 12:06 AM

31. I do not believe so because to pass an amendment to the Constitution really need to get a

significant amount of the population of the country to agree to it.
Besides the amendment can be written to be seasonable and spell out things like registration is required yet an outright ban on all guns is not allowed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cstanleytech (Reply #31)

Sat Aug 15, 2020, 01:44 AM

33. Chicago and DC outright banned them for 30 years

How did they get away with that for so long?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Polybius (Reply #33)

Sat Aug 15, 2020, 01:53 AM

35. Because the makeup of the courts is fluid and the 2nd amendment as it's written is flawwed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cstanleytech (Reply #35)

Sat Aug 15, 2020, 01:11 PM

41. Not entirely true

It never went to the SC before 2008 or so, so it was never ruled on when the makeup was different.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to C Moon (Original post)

Fri Aug 14, 2020, 03:59 PM

13. With that logic I guess it's only a matter of time before home owners can acquire their own SAM's

and anti-tank weaponry.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Yossarian Joad (Reply #13)

Fri Aug 14, 2020, 04:30 PM

19. "I felt threatened by that airliner".

Had to "Stand my Ground"!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Yossarian Joad (Reply #13)

Fri Aug 14, 2020, 05:19 PM

26. It's actually pretty easy

SAMs and Anti-tank weaponry are rocket propelled and continue to provide thrust as they travel to the target / run out of fuel. If you bring artillery into the discussion, like a howitzer or canon, those are area of effect weapons that provide indirect fire and are appropriately classified as 'artillery' and not 'arms.'

All of these weapons are crew served, and requires a tremendous amount of skill to load, store, and fire accurately / safely. One of the smaller field artillery pieces used by the Army, the M102 105mm howitzer, requires a crew of 8 to operate.

The ATF classifies many of these items as 'destructive devices' and they do give out licenses to private individuals to own and operate them. They are, however, prohibitively expensive with a 105mm round costing over $400. A single hellfire anti-tank missile, which is unavailable to the public, costs the government over $100k. A Javelin anti-tank missile, which would be more useful to a single dude wanting to fuck some shit up (though also unavailable to the public), costs $200k for 1 missile and the launcher.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Yossarian Joad (Reply #13)


Response to C Moon (Original post)

Fri Aug 14, 2020, 04:19 PM

16. Fuck! What happened to the 9th Circuit???

They used to be good.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ananda (Reply #16)

Fri Aug 14, 2020, 04:36 PM

22. McConnell?

McConnell has been polluting the courts with wingers for almost four years. It's his primary goal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ananda (Reply #16)


Response to C Moon (Original post)

Fri Aug 14, 2020, 04:30 PM

20. The ammosexuals are surely all fellating each other in celebration. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to C Moon (Original post)

Fri Aug 14, 2020, 04:46 PM

23. if I want a nuclear device will judge lee let me have my 2A rights to use one? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to C Moon (Original post)

Fri Aug 14, 2020, 05:00 PM

25. WTF does "well regulated" mean anyway?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rickyhall (Reply #25)

Fri Aug 14, 2020, 05:26 PM

27. At the time it was written, well equipped and proficient.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rickyhall (Reply #25)

Fri Aug 14, 2020, 05:44 PM

28. It means "well trained"/"proficient". n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rickyhall (Reply #25)

Sat Aug 15, 2020, 01:47 AM

34. It would mean just that if it stopped there

But then it said "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. There's not much that can be done unless it's repealed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to C Moon (Original post)

Fri Aug 14, 2020, 10:30 PM

29. Tthe major online merchants who sell such magazines are already selling them to Californians.

Last year, a similar ruling was in effect for a week, during which Californians bought millions of them. Given the current political climate, sales will, if anything, be even higher.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to C Moon (Original post)

Sat Aug 15, 2020, 06:23 AM

36. here's why

Trump is doing exactly what the federalist society is telling him to do, just like they told gw bush as he also packed the courts
https://www.politico.com/news/2019/12/22/trump-judges-9th-circuit-appeals-court-088833

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to C Moon (Original post)

Sat Aug 15, 2020, 08:51 AM

38. Fantastic! n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to C Moon (Original post)

Sat Aug 15, 2020, 01:22 PM

45. This ban discriminates

against slow reloaders.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to C Moon (Original post)

Sun Aug 16, 2020, 03:28 PM

46. Good. Magazine bans are nothing more than security theater

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to friendly_iconoclast (Reply #46)

Sun Aug 16, 2020, 11:17 PM

47. Quite so. They're as meaningless as assault weapons bans.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread