Sniper 6,372 Posted April 3, 2019 2 hours ago, Ray Ray said: https://abcnews-go-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/abcnews.go.com/amp/US/wireStory/delay-sought-ruling-allowing-high-capacity-ammo-magazines-62120179?amp_js_v=a2&_gsa=1#referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=From %1%24s&share=https%3A%2F%2Fabcnews.go.com%2FUS%2FwireStory%2Fdelay-sought-ruling-allowing-high-capacity-ammo-magazines-62120179 The judge threw out both magazine bans. So all magazines are legal. From that link: ...."Becerra said in a statement that California leads the nation when it comes to gun safety and refuses to go backward. The state has prohibited such magazines since 2000, though people who had such magazines before then were allowed to keep them. Benitez threw out both the 2000 law and then 2016 law and ballot measure banning possession." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
1LtCAP 4,259 Posted April 3, 2019 this should be helpful too. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-reshapes-9th-circuit-gop-judges-near-majority?fbclid=IwAR2YY1IsQ57GJ-p2qUydGlzc0EtLGsQZNjIPtAXHr3pvsei-wz5BztX5MbM less chance of the nutty ninth helping keep the ban...…. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SJG 253 Posted April 3, 2019 Vermont Mag Ban https://vtdigger.org/2019/03/20/judge-rejects-states-motion-dismiss-high-capacity-magazine-ban-case/ Wonder if Judge will look to California decision 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
67gtonut 847 Posted April 3, 2019 Just now, SJG said: Vermont Mag Ban https://vtdigger.org/2019/03/20/judge-rejects-states-motion-dismiss-high-capacity-magazine-ban-case/ 2. No posting of random news articles without at least a paragraph about what made you post it or your opinion. No one cares to see a post with a link. If anyone wants to see whats going on in the news, we will go to a news sites. NJGF is not Drudge Report. I opened the post to see why it inspired you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SJG 253 Posted April 3, 2019 2 minutes ago, 67gtonut said: 2. No posting of random news articles without at least a paragraph about what made you post it or your opinion. No one cares to see a post with a link. If anyone wants to see whats going on in the news, we will go to a news sites. NJGF is not Drudge Report. I opened the post to see why it inspired you. Maybe you should look at my comment above Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
67gtonut 847 Posted April 3, 2019 1 minute ago, SJG said: Maybe you should look at my comment above LOL..... you added your comment after the fact...... I am quick on the trigger..... all good..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SJG 253 Posted April 3, 2019 Maybe you are too quick. 3 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
67gtonut 847 Posted April 3, 2019 Just now, SJG said: Maybe you are too quick. Not the first time I have heard that...... 1 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EngineerJet 191 Posted April 3, 2019 10 hours ago, SJG said: Maybe you are too quick. That's what she said! But seriously, this is a massive win for freedom. These people who are now trying to fight this decision under their misguided belief that lives are at stake. It always brings me back to the fundamentals of liberty vs security. All they focus on is security using control as a method and not blinking at the cost of freedom. This does give me hope because of all those brothers and sisters in California never thought thted get their hands on 30 rounders. I genuinely believe it is within our reach. Patience paid off for Cali. Even if this is temporary (in the worst case). Atleast more people will have higher capacity mags, which is a win for freedom. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nondisclosure 55 Posted April 3, 2019 When does NJ get freedom? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
njJoniGuy 2,129 Posted April 4, 2019 47 minutes ago, nondisclosure said: When does NJ get freedom? When Hell truly freezes over, I'm afraid. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Downtownv 1,764 Posted April 4, 2019 51 minutes ago, nondisclosure said: When does NJ get freedom? When every politician in NJ is dead, but the people of NJ were not big supporters of The American revolution neither. They will never flood Trenton for guns or the tyrannical taxation. We are the whiner state. Acta Non verba was never even an idea in NJ! It's easier to simply take it or leave it. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mike Jones 3 Posted April 4, 2019 1 hour ago, nondisclosure said: When does NJ get freedom? Freedom? {laughs in NJ Oppressive Tyranny} Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fring Spield 1 Posted April 4, 2019 Can anyone clarify as to whether the CA District court judge had the latitude or jurisdiction to rule on the basic question of the constitutionality of the ban on mags >10 rds, or was he only ruling on the issue of invalidating the ballot initiative that reversed the grandfathering of possessing them? I'm not convinced that the news outlets understand the situation completely. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SJG 253 Posted April 4, 2019 4 hours ago, Fring Spield said: Can anyone clarify as to whether the CA District court judge had the latitude or jurisdiction to rule on the basic question of the constitutionality of the ban on mags >10 rds, or was he only ruling on the issue of invalidating the ballot initiative that reversed the grandfathering of possessing them? I'm not convinced that the news outlets understand the situation completely. Yes, he has complete jurisdiction to address all Quote Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GRIZ 3,365 Posted April 4, 2019 On 3/29/2019 at 7:26 PM, Maksim said: Nothing yet. It would mean someone needs to file a mag capacity case in NJ and have it go through our court system. They would be able to use the Cali decision as case law. Case law is set by am appeallate court. This is "law of the case". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnnyB 4,289 Posted April 4, 2019 PSA may know something we don't! They keep sending me "California Freedom Specials" on normal cap mags. I tried and it let me go all the way to place order button with no warnings! I think I could have placed the order. Who knows? OOPS! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JimB1 554 Posted April 5, 2019 Ruger sent an email yesterday that they were out of magazines because of the high demand in CA. They are making more -Jim Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CAL. .30 M1 2,101 Posted April 5, 2019 And it is NOW back in effect at 5pm today - the same judge issued a stay on his own order - I wonder who got to him? He will probably end up with a mysterious heart attack like Scalia........ In response to a motion from the California Department of Justice, US District Court Judge Roger Benitez, who issued a permanent injunction against enforcement of California’s “high capacity” magazine ban, has just issued a stay of his own injunction. That means that the window for ordering standard capacity magazines is closing. His order goes into effect at 5:00pm Pacific time on Friday, April 5. You can read the full order here, but this is the relevant portion: THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Judgment is stayed in part pending final resolution of the appeal from the Judgment. The permanent injunction enjoining enforcement of California Penal Code §32310(a) and (b) is hereby stayed, effective 5:00 p.m., Friday, April 5, 2019. IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED that the preliminary injunction issued on June 29, 2017, enjoining enforcement of California Penal Code §32310 (c) and (d) shall remain in effect. 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. Dated: April 4, 2019. The ban on possession of “high capacity” magazines will not be enforced while the case is argued and decided, but California residents will not be able to buy them after 5:00pm tomorrow. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
silverado427 10,555 Posted April 5, 2019 I wonder how many mags made it over the wall. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
remixer 1,645 Posted April 5, 2019 Its one of those Great cases that in the end might mean nothing for anyone outside of that courts jurisdiction. If the 9th circuit agree with this being unconstitutional it will end there... California will not challenge that ruling and it will never goto the supreme court.. The left has gotten smart and realized they may lose in a certain court but its better to lose locally then challenge it nationally and risk losing and making it law of the land every where. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
voyager9 3,417 Posted April 5, 2019 I don’t think it’s unusual for judges to stay their own ruling while it goes through appeal. It’s done fairly often from what I can tell. It allows the judge to craft the order on their own terms and makes sure that’s a factor in the appeal. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SIGMan Freud 93 Posted April 5, 2019 16 minutes ago, remixer said: Its one of those Great cases that in the end might mean nothing for anyone outside of that courts jurisdiction. If the 9th circuit agree with this being unconstitutional it will end there... California will not challenge that ruling and it will never goto the supreme court.. The left has gotten smart and realized they may lose in a certain court but its better to lose locally then challenge it nationally and risk losing and making it law of the land every where. I see your point, but the libs know a mag capacity restriction does nothing to save lives. They might actually prefer this gets national/SCOTUS attention coming into the 2020 election. And who knows what SCOTUS would do with wobbly kneed Roberts on the bench. It could be win-win for the Dems. If the CA ban is upheld, the libs could push for a nationwide ban. If the ban is tossed, they have another red-meat issue for their rabid base. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
remixer 1,645 Posted April 5, 2019 3 minutes ago, SIGMan Freud said: I see your point, but the libs know a mag capacity restriction does nothing to save lives. They might actually prefer this gets national/SCOTUS attention coming into the 2020 election. And who knows what SCOTUS would do with wobbly kneed Roberts on the bench. It could be win-win for the Dems. If the CA ban is upheld, the libs could push for a nationwide ban. If the ban is tossed, they have another red-meat issue for their rabid base. When did the libs think mag restrictions save lives? Gun laws are NOT to save lives..... They are to put gun owners in a box. I doubt this case will leave CA... they might win or lose. regardless i think it stay in CA... if the supreme court took the case and ruled mag limits as unconstitutional it would pretty much devastate and demoralize the left. I do not trust roberts as far as i can throw him. If the Supreme court ended up taking the CA and ruled in the gun owners favor, it would kill plans for a nationwide ban as it would be illegal to ban something the SC already ruled as a right. whats up with the time limit on buying the mags... is that strange.. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mreal75 9 Posted April 5, 2019 I'd be interested in seeing what evidence the lawmakers relied on in passing these 10-round limits in states like NJ and CA. I mean, there must be SOMETHING out there that shows 10 rounds is better/safer than 15 right???....I could just imagine how these hearings went down. It's all an opinion game and we're all at the short end of it Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zeke 5,504 Posted April 5, 2019 11 minutes ago, remixer said: When did the libs think mag restrictions save lives? Gun laws are NOT to save lives..... They are to put gun owners in a box. I doubt this case will leave CA... they might win or lose. regardless i think it stay in CA... if the supreme court took the case and ruled mag limits as unconstitutional it would pretty much devastate and demoralize the left. I do not trust roberts as far as i can throw him. If the Supreme court ended up taking the CA and ruled in the gun owners favor, it would kill plans for a nationwide ban as it would be illegal to ban something the SC already ruled as a right. whats up with the time limit on buying the mags... is that strange.. If ca loses it stays jus like dc. If we the people lose it gets appealed. Think about that, a national agenda, So much for local representation. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
remixer 1,645 Posted April 5, 2019 2 minutes ago, Mreal75 said: I'd be interested in seeing what evidence the lawmakers relied on in passing these 10-round limits in states like NJ and CA. I mean, there must be SOMETHING out there that shows 10 rounds is better/safer than 15 right???....I could just imagine how these hearings went down. It's all an opinion game and we're all at the short end of it There is no evidence.... "Feelings" are not Evidence. 1 minute ago, Zeke said: If ca loses it stays jus like dc. If we the people lose it gets appealed. Think about that, a national agenda, So much for local representation. if CA loses they can bring to the next step which is the SC... they wont do that. If CA Wins the people can bring it to the SC. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mike Jones 3 Posted April 5, 2019 2 hours ago, silverado427 said: I wonder how many mags made it over the wall. Just consider these 30 round mags “undocumented” or “refugees” looking for Sanctuary... problem solved. Illegals are protected, but Constitutional Rights are trampled... yeah, makes total sense. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zeke 5,504 Posted April 5, 2019 15 minutes ago, remixer said: There is no evidence.... "Feelings" are not Evidence. if CA loses they can bring to the next step which is the SC... they wont do that. If CA Wins the people can bring it to the SC. That’s what I’m sayen Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mreal75 9 Posted April 5, 2019 5 minutes ago, Mike Jones said: Just consider these 30 round mags “undocumented” or “refugees” looking for Sanctuary... problem solved. Illegals are protected, but Constitutional Rights are trampled... yeah, makes total sense. Apparently, its not a "right" anymore unless the head honchos say so Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites