Additional reactions culled from the case thread in Litigation

[bv141]

One more interesting thing - regarding sales on websites where the seller is out of state? How would CA-DoJ get the sales data for sales made to CA residents?

Beginning April 1, CA Tax receipts must be paid to the State for internet based sales.

[Uncivil Engineer]

Beginning April 1, CA Tax receipts must be paid to the State for internet based sales.

They might get the sales amount they won't get a report of what you bought. That would violate privacy laws.

[HibikiR]

Yeah, with Trump and SCOTUS and even the current makeup of the 9th, the legal landscape is nothing like what DOJ has seen before.

[Chewy65]

Do we have any kind of estimate on how many Californians have placed orders for mags this weekend? Tens, hundreds, thousands, tens of thousands? I'm curious as to whether a higher order of magnitude might dissuade DOJ from trying to pursue individual criminal charges.

No way will the DOJ go after thouands of people with criminal charges. Expect it to work this way.

1. They get a list of buyers from cooperative vendors.
2. DOJ sends letters to all buyers threatening criminal action if you don't . . .
3. DOJ does bring criminal charges against a few folk (low hanging fruit) select to make an example. Its called selective prosecution and is perfectly legal.

[CandG]

Worst Case: The largest case of active civil disobedience in the 2A community in california's history.

I would venture a guess that for the last 15 years since the federal magazine ban expired there has already been mass civil disobedience re: large capacity magazines.

CA has required "safe and sane" fireworks since 1973, and yet every July 4th our whole state looks like Normandy in 1944. And unlike LCMs, the "fun" fireworks are something you can't even HAVE. Still, people don't care. Imagine if the "fun" fireworks were legal to own, and only illegal to acquire, as has been the case with LCMs - just about every household would have a stockpile of awesome fireworks (with a distinct lack of sales receipt evidence), with everyone claiming they don't remember exactly when they got them but it was definitely before 1973.

Most gun owners have always been fully aware of the ban on importing LCMs into CA post-2000, but I doubt very many of them gave a damn. I'm pretty sure most gun owners who wanted them got them - it wasn't difficult, every state we share a border with sells them. If anything, all the ban did was make people use them in public less frequently and more carefully. Just like how the firework ban did nothing except make people look around for cops before lighting the fuse.

[bv141]

Yeah. It took them many years to start selling AR-style rifles in free states. I'm not even sure if they do here in California... it's been a long time since I've been to one.

Bass Pro does not sell ARs in the San Jose store....

[jcwatchdog]

Do we have any kind of estimate on how many Californians have placed orders for mags this weekend? Tens, hundreds, thousands, tens of thousands? I'm curious as to whether a higher order of magnitude might dissuade DOJ from trying to pursue individual criminal charges.

[D16er]

I'm sure there is time to call and cancel if you want to wait and
see how things play out.

I think I'm going with the cancelled order and playing the waiting game route.

[peregrine1220]

Midway still no-go

[tenemae]

Do we have any kind of estimate on how many Californians have placed orders for mags this weekend?

Websites have been taken out because of the traffic.

Yeah... it takes a good amount of traffic to DoS a website. High Thousands to maybe teens sounds about right. And that was just the first day when the websites were crippled. Of course, that doesn't necessarily translate into actual orders. It'd be fascinating to get the real number.

Thousands of orders translating into tens of thousands of magazines doesn't sound too far-fetched if you count the entire weekend.

[CandG]

Asking for a friend: what are the legal implications of having possessed/acquired/imported/manufactured etc. a "large capacity" magazine one March 28, 2019?

[D16er]

Midway still no-go

Prepper Gun Shop is shipping to CA again

[Discogodfather]

Asking for a friend: what are the legal implications of having possessed/acquired/imported/manufactured etc. a "large capacity" magazine one March 28, 2019?

From the Wikipedia excerpt:

"Under Proposition 63, mere possession of a large-capacity magazine is punishable as a misdemeanor with a $100 fine or an infraction with a $100 fine. This prohibition applies to magazines acquired prior to January 1, 2000 that were previously considered "grandfathered."[21] Importation, manufacture, lending, assembling a large-capacity magazine from a parts kit, or buying a large-capacity magazine remains chargeable as a felony or a misdemeanor.[22] On June 30, 2017, a federal judge blocked the enforcement of Proposition 63's ban on the possession of large-capacity magazines, pending the outcome of litigation concerning the ban. On March 29, 2019, the ban on possession was blocked permanently by the district court.[23] Magazines that would have been subject to the Proposition 63 ban are legal for private citizens to keep until the injunction is either lifted and/or the ban is upheld by the courts."

[mopar2002]

So is the hand gun rooster next?

[CandG]

So is the hand gun rooster next?

It's already at SCOTUS, awaiting a decision on whether or not they'll hear it. If they do, it's likely they'll strike it down, but the odds they take the case at all are not guaranteed. We should know in the next few months. There's a whole other thread about that, see Pena v Cid.

There are also some other good cases in the pipeline: the ban on online ammo sales (Rhodes v Becerra), the assault weapon ban (Rupp v Becerra), and others.

Bonus photo of the handgun rooster: