Additional reactions culled from the case thread in Litigation

[oak18]

These mags are just as good as $50 Circle 10 mags. This is a no brainer for the price. See if they will take a Ca address.

https://gunmagwarehouse.com/bulgaria...-magazine.html

[M60A1Rise]

As soon as we get an official 'GO!' I'm setting this thing up on my keyboard to hit 'Buy Now' all day while I'm at work!

[Scratch705]

prepper's website is laggging!!!!!!

[drifts1]

I know of one LGS that just posted 10+ mags for sale, to everyone 😁

[MC06]

prepper's website is laggging!!!!!!

I was on there. Put g19 mags in the cart. By the time it took to get to the cart sold out. Lol. No worries, just got a text back from my lgs, they have them in stock.

[RaceDay]

prepper's website is laggging!!!!!!

Lagging is being kind. That site is getting hammered.

[Maximus28]

Preppers worked for me. Took a lot of patience, though.

[mend0k]

So does this mean we don’t need fixed magazines as well?

[dabeater85]

jestice arms is always great

[AKSOG]

[ar15barrels]

So does this mean we don’t need fixed magazines as well?

There is no change to the Assault Weapon laws.
If you are using the "fixed magazine" configuration of being legal, nothing has changed.
You can only fix a magazine which holds 10 rounds or less into a rifle to keep it compliant.
The use of a standard capacity mag that holds more than 10 rounds in your fixed magazine semi-auto centerfire rifle would make your otherwise legal semi-auto centerfire rifle into an illegal assault weapon.

If you were to go to a "featureless" configuration, you can now buy standard capacity mags and use them.
There is no longer a restriction to low capacity (10 rounds or less) mags in any firearm which legally accepts detachable magazines.

[ar15barrels]

Yup, and..

"Coupon code "HSC2019" is not valid" just now.

[Syntax Error]

Prepper's Gun Shop is getting hammered. You Calgunners roll heavy and buy a lot when given the chance.

[CandG]

I really, really wish I could listen to the phone call happening between Gavin and Xavier tonight.

I'm getting entirely way too much joy thinking about Gavin's "safety for all act" inadvertently rewinding 2 decades of CA magazine ban law, and the 69,000 new "assault weapons" that can legally use them thanks to the bullet button ban : rofl2:

[RickD427]

No, and they never have been.

This law never went in to affect thanks to the preliminary injunction obtained by the CRPA and NRA.

And for the record I've never stopped using my standard capacity mags at the range.

Kes,

I don't think you're fully understanding of the difference between the ban on possession under Penal Code section 32310 and the liability to civil seizure under section 32390.

The Preliminary Injunction issued by Judge Benitez on June 29, 2017 only applied to PC 32310(c) and (d). It did not apply to PC 32390.

If you are aware of a second, or different, Preliminary Injunction issued in the case, then please cite it. I am only aware of the June 29 Preliminary Injunction.

It's a significant point, and one that probably now is more significant due to today's decision. In today's decision, Judge Benitez explains in the dicta of his decision how PC 32390 fails to meet constitutional standards, but in the holding portion of the decision, he only invalidates PC 32310. That strikes me as being rather strange (and I suspect the reason may be in the way the case was pled by the plaintiffs - I'd like to hear from our JD's on that point) that he did not also invalidate PC 32390 in his holding.