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.

  • @[email protected]
    -3•1 year ago

    Could you help me understand how sexual abuse of minors is somehow related to firearms?

    Probably not, since you’ll just deliberately miss the point to try and deflect.

    The pro-gun community routinely claims that gun laws are pointless because they’ll just be broken anyway, a philosophy which is deeply stupid and morally reprehensible when applied to absolutely anything else, but they seem to think they logic is sound when it comes to gun laws.

    Does such a reality intersect at all with your hyperbole?

    Yes. Vastly more so than pro-gun promises to keep people safe from criminals and tyranny.

    • Jeremy [Iowa]English
      2•1 year ago

      Probably not, since you’ll just deliberately miss the point to try and deflect.

      Ah, I see. You can’t explain the canyon-crossing leap between the two because of the other person - it’s totally not because you’re connecting nonsense.

      Neat.

      The pro-gun community routinely claims that gun laws are pointless because they’ll just be broken anyway, a philosophy which is deeply stupid and morally reprehensible when applied to absolutely anything else, but they seem to think they logic is sound when it comes to gun laws.

      I’m still looking for the connection to your bizarre obsession with the abuse of children. Did you have one?

      This, aside from your absurd reduction of the rejection of ineffective laws which provide no benefit regarding the stated problems yet provide an pointless restriction on otherwise law-abiding citizens.

      Yes. Vastly more so than pro-gun promises to keep people safe from criminals and tyranny.

      I see we’re still deep in the realm of works cited: crack pipe. Fair enough.