A federal judge has struck down a California law banning gun magazines that hold more than 10 rounds. U.S.

California cannot ban gun owners from having detachable magazines that hold more than 10 rounds, a federal judge ruled Friday.

The decision from U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez won’t take effect immediately. California Attorney General Rob Bonta, a Democrat, has already filed a notice to appeal the ruling. The ban is likely to remain in effect while the case is still pending.

This is the second time Benitez has struck down California’s law banning certain types of magazines. The first time he struck it down — way back in 2017 — an appeals court ended up reversing his decision.

  • @not_that_guy05
    -1•1 year ago

    Which is why I said need, not really. I am not saying to banned them either. We don’t need a lot of things in life, but doesn’t mean we don’t want them. Which also goes back to country folks having different needs compared to city folks. I get that there’s going to be a lot of resistance against it, there will always be resistance in everything.

    Yes I believe that manufacturers have a responsibility especially when they are making narco like firearms to cater to that kind of life. (Talking about all those gold, diamond, and graphic firearms.) (No I’m not talking about the laser ingrave grips LARPS want to get.)

    From reading your article, wouldn’t the serial registration also help prevent US drug cartels from spamming mexico with ghost guns, which could be traced back to crime organizations? Wouldn’t that dammed one of the toxic rivers and help bring attention too other rivers?

    • Jeremy [Iowa]English
      2•1 year ago

      From reading your article, wouldn’t the serial registration also help prevent US drug cartels from spamming mexico with ghost guns, which could be traced back to crime organizations?

      The entire premise to the ghost gun fearmongering is the lack of traceability - “serial numbers” aren’t part of it.

      I somehow suspect a cartel manufacturing firearms isn’t going to bother registering it before trafficking it to Mexico. So, no - it would be entirely ineffective.

      • @not_that_guy05
        -1•1 year ago

        No, but it could stop some from buying from actual legal stores. If they are being manufactured illegal (ghost guns) that would be a different game plan. I am focusing more on the legal way to buy firearms and move them to Mexico. Like you said it is a multifaceted issue but repairing like cracks here there will help reinforce other parts of the issue.

        • Jeremy [Iowa]English
          4•1 year ago

          No, but it could stop some from buying from actual legal stores.

          That would be the entire point to the existing straw purchase legislation - which would be a better place to start, if such avenues are demonstrably the actual problem.

          Like you said it is a multifaceted issue but repairing like cracks here there will help reinforce other parts of the issue.

          Addressing symptoms will never be as effective as addressing root issues, you’ll just feel better about negligible impact. That’s the problem.