Duncan V Bonta - large cap mags: OLD THREAD

[thethreegs]

N/A

[flyer898]

The district court in Oregon upheld Oregon's magazine ban. The court found defendant's clearly biased experts more credible than the plaintiff's experts. The judge ruled based her ideology and not the law in a 122 page decision.
On the good side the Oregon state court of appeal upheld the injunction against enforcement of the ban.
Here is Stephen Halbrook's analysis:

https://reason.com/volokh/2023/07/25/second-amendment-roundup-upholding-oregons-magazine-ban/

[RANGER295]

That's correct.

PC32310 does not cover high capacity magazine conversion kits though.
PC32311 covers high capacity magazine conversion kits.

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/f....1&lawCode=PEN

Correct. I believe it also does not cover the public nuisance issue. I believe we would be successful in a fight on that if we win this but I could see some jurisdictions trying to use that when the other restrictions go away.

[Bolt_Action]

That's correct.

PC32310 does not cover high capacity magazine conversion kits though.
PC32311 covers high capacity magazine conversion kits.

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/f....1&lawCode=PEN

But, if PC32310 is dead, you could purchase a high capacity magazine kit outside of the state, use it manufacture a high capacity magazine outside the state, and then import it into the state.

[7.62mm_fmj]

PC32310 does not cover high capacity magazine conversion kits though.
PC32311 covers high capacity magazine conversion kits.

So if PC32310 is (again) permanently enjoined, we could go out an purchase factory "high capacity" mags to our hearts' desire, but it would not be possible to purchase "conversion kits?"

If that's the case, it seems like Plaintiffs perhaps should have amended their complaint to pick up the loose ends.

[jcwatchdog]

So it looks possible mag extension base pads will STILL be off limits in CA even after the mag capacity ban drops (IF it drops)

If you buy the magazines with them already installed, it?s not a kit. They just came that way.

[taperxz]

So if PC32310 is (again) permanently enjoined, we could go out an purchase factory "high capacity" mags to our hearts' desire, but it would not be possible to purchase "conversion kits?"

If that's the case, it seems like Plaintiffs perhaps should have amended their complaint to pick up the loose ends.

It would make the conversion kit law moot since they are no long considered high capacity and no longer illegal to obtain or possess.

[Chewy65]

So if PC32310 is (again) permanently enjoined, we could go out an purchase factory "high capacity" mags to our hearts' desire, but it would not be possible to purchase "conversion kits?"

If that's the case, it seems like Plaintiffs perhaps should have amended their complaint to pick up the loose ends.

Yes and No.

Yes you can go out and buy the magazines and law enforcement can't enforce PC 32310 against you during the pendency of Duncan. But Benitez rules on the merits at trial for the Attorney General it isn't clear that 32310 cannot then be enforced for your purchase during the pendency of the prelimary injunction. More confusing is what if Benitez finds for the plaintiff's on the mertis and issues a permanent injunction. Odds are the AG files an appeal vacating the judment and the permanent injunction. Can you then be prosecuted for the purchase during the preliminary?

The best answer is read what the injunction says.

[ar15barrels]

So it looks possible mag extension base pads will STILL be off limits in CA even after the mag capacity ban drops (IF it drops)

Only parts that make a magazine (that is not already a large capacity magazine) into a large capacity magazine are problematic.

For example, it would be illegal to get a +1 or +2 basepad for a 10 round magazine because that would be creating a large capacity magazine from a group of parts that were NOT previously a large capacity magazine.

Also, base pads that do not create a large capacity magazine should be fine so perhaps you were to get a +2 basepad for an existing 8 round magazine and now you have made a 10 round magazine.
Adding 2 to 8 does not get you over 10 so you have not created a new large capacity magazine.

Base pads used to replace worn out basepads on pre-existing large capacity magazines should also be fine because their use does NOT create a new large capacity magazine.
The example here is if you replaced your 11 round mag's +1 basepad with a +3 basepad.
You have not created a new large capacity magazine.

[ar15barrels]

But, if PC32310 is dead, you could purchase a high capacity magazine kit outside of the state, use it manufacture a high capacity magazine outside the state, and then import it into the state.

Of course.
Nothing illegal about that.

[ar15barrels]

So if PC32310 is (again) permanently enjoined, we could go out an purchase factory "high capacity" mags to our hearts' desire, but it would not be possible to purchase "conversion kits?"

If that's the case, it seems like Plaintiffs perhaps should have amended their complaint to pick up the loose ends.

I think that amending the complaint at this point would be cause for a lot more delay than we want.
It would be better to deal with 32311 later after we succeed on removing the basis that 32311 stands on.
Simply being able to purchase/import/sell complete large capacity mags is enough of a start.

[AlmostHeaven]

I think that amending the complaint at this point would be cause for a lot more delay than we want.
It would be better to deal with 32311 later after we succeed on removing the basis that 32311 stands on.
Simply being able to purchase/import/sell complete large capacity mags is enough of a start.

I concur. Getting Duncan v. Bonta up through the Ninth Circuit and to the Supreme Court takes priority over any maneuvers at the district court level.

If SCOTUS rules that the Second Amendment protects high-capacity magazines, starting a new California Penal Code Section 32311 challenge should go significantly more quickly than complicating the current litigation.

[Mithrandir13]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uW4f_hhLitQ

[tacticalcity]

Is there a time limit for a judge to issue a ruling? Can it go more than say, a year without a ruling? Seems like it has been forever. You would think the case would expire if too much time passes.

[ar15barrels]

Is there a time limit for a judge to issue a ruling? Can it go more than say, a year without a ruling? Seems like it has been forever. You would think the case would expire if too much time passes.

I do not think there is any legislated or standardized time limit.
The judge releases the ruling when he is ready to release the ruling.