Additional reactions culled from the case thread in Litigation

[pistol3]

This is California and you expect gun law to be "realistic" as in it should make sense?

I think we are so used to losing, that when we win, we start dreaming up over-the-top scenarios in which we all still end up losing. Where courts will refuse to follow due process, or even basic fairness, because the defendant is an evil gun owner. I think worst case, the 9th Circuit reinstates the ban, and some reasonable accommodation will be made for those who obtained magazines while the law was enjoined to dispose of them.

[CandG]

I think we are so used to losing, that when we win, we start dreaming up over-the-top scenarios in which we all still end up losing. Where courts will refuse to follow due process, or even basic fairness, because the defendant is an evil gun owner. I think worst case, the 9th Circuit reinstates the ban, and some reasonable accommodation will be made for those who obtained magazines while the law was enjoined to dispose of them.

Worst case scenario, in my mind, is the 9th circuit overturns the order and declares that PC 32310 is immediately valid and enforceable in its entirety, making everyone's 11+rd magazines immediately illegal (remember the 2017 preliminary injunction is invalid now) until and unless SCOTUS decides to overturn that.

Where your guess on the "worst case scenario" is flawed is that you assume the hostile 9th circuit will make "some reasonable accommodation" for gun owners.

[1bulletBarney]

Worst case scenario, in my mind, is the 9th circuit overturns the order and declares that PC 32310 is immediately valid and enforceable in its entirety, making everyone's 11+rd magazines immediately illegal (remember the 2017 preliminary injunction is invalid now) until and unless SCOTUS decides to overturn that.

Where your guess on the "worst case scenario" is flawed is that you assume the hostile 9th circuit will make "some reasonable accommodation" for gun owners.

I like the handgun rooster better...

51WPQSQ.jpg

[bgarbled]

https://youtu.be/7ciO2SN3iNM

[MajorCaliber]

[viet4lifeOC]

Everyone seems hellbent on figuring out a way that a win is actually a loss and to sit and do nothing like a gaggle of cucks.

In reality however, laws are only enforceable when followed. Sitting around and waiting is how you lose. Facts on the ground, once changed, are the new reality. When the left gets an injunction, they are lined up ready to blow that hole wide open and make later enforcement nigh impossible.

Take a cue and blow the door wide open. Are you waiting for the judge himself to come to your home and slam a D60 into your rifle? Get a mix of sensible and obscene, just to offend the enemy. Because that's what they are. The enemy.

So mush THIS.

[Elgatodeacero]

One issue that makes this very hard for the state is that Judge Benitez also ruled the statute that has been enjoined is a taking under the 5th Amendment.

Therefore, no matter how the courts rules on the 2nd Amendment issue, this statute would still have a major defect that renders it unconstitutional.... the state cannot take private property without compensation to the owners.

I dont want to go too much into this right now because the state is likely going to make another mistake in this litigation, but California state government has really stepped into a huge mess of its own creation and the 5th Amendment takings ruling makes this far more difficult for the state.

[Elgatodeacero]

Dupe.

[Kokopelli]

There has been NOTHING in the MSM media about the order from Judge Roger T. Benitez. When Pelosi shifted from the Mueller investigation to healthcare, the MSM followed her leade immediately. But nothing on this case except honorable mention on conservative sites. When the Left is on the losing side, they seem to go silent.

I stated before that this has the potential to destroy every limited capacity law in the country if it gets to SCOTUS. Status quo, or risk everything. Those are Bacerra's options. Whoever calls the shots for the Progressive Left is calling the shots here.

As for me, I love the freedom and joy that Judge Roger T. Benitez's ruling brought to the gun community. I no longer have neutered MAGAzines and at my old age, I will enjoy my liberty and rights until my last breath.

[bobbodaggit]

Tickets in hand....

[Dvrjon]

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.

[Scott Connors]

Regardless of whether CA-DoJ goes down without a fight or not, there is still the PC that relates to magazines with a capacity > 10 being a nuisance. Until that PC gets stayed/ruled unconstitutional, it would be prudent to take 10 round magazines to public ranges to avoid any risk of confiscation.

Wouldn't the nuisance provision of the PC be dependent upon the portion of the PC that was just ruled unconstitutional? The theory was that the mags were nuisances because they were contraband, but if they are legal then confiscating them is an illegal taking of the sort that Judge Benitez also condemns.

[Dvrjon]

Wouldn't the nuisance provision of the PC be dependent upon the portion of the PC that was just ruled unconstitutional? The theory was that the mags were nuisances because they were contraband, but if they are legal then confiscating them is an illegal taking of the sort that Judge Benitez also condemns.

PEN 32390

32390. Except as provided in Article 2 (commencing with Section 32400) of this chapter and in Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 17700) of Division 2 of Title 2, any large-capacity magazine is a nuisance and is subject to Section 18010.

[Elgatodeacero]

I dont think it matters that 32390 was not enjoined.

If an item is constitutionally protected then a state cannot simply declare it a nuisance and nullify the consitutional protection of the item.

Easy example, books of all types are consitutionally protected. The state cannot pick a book or a type of book (say Fabio bodice rippers) and define them as a nuisance and thus make them illegal.

That will not work.

[M60A1Rise]

I'm in but my only worry is the importation portion of all this and dates/times. Pretty sure all these Credit Card purchases can be traced and i'd expect any business to concede giving the information. Just don't know if the communists can force them to give it out. But hell i'm no lawyer and have taken the chance.