California Law Capping Magazine Capacity Struck Down By Federal Judge | Eastern North Carolina Now

    Publisher's Note: This post appears here courtesy of the The Daily Wire. The author of this post is Leif Le Mahieu.

    A California law banning possession and sale of gun magazines holding more than 10 rounds was blocked by a federal judge who said the law was unconstitutional in a decision released on Friday.

    U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California Roger Benitez wrote in a 71-page ruling that law-abiding citizens had constitutional rights to own magazines of greater than 10 rounds, and that there was no historic legal precedent giving California the right to pass such a law.

    "Removable firearm magazines of all sizes are necessary components of semiautomatic firearms. Therefore, magazines come within the text of the constitutional declaration that the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed," Benitez wrote. "Because millions of removable firearm magazines able to hold between 10 and 30 rounds are commonly owned by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes, including self-defense, and because they are reasonably related to service in the militia, the magazines are presumptively within the protection of the Second Amendment."

    The judge said that California did not justify "its sweeping ban and dispossession mandate," which was first passed via ballot initiative back in 2016.

    "One government solution to a few mad men with guns is a law that makes into criminals responsible, law-abiding people wanting larger magazines simply to protect themselves. The history and tradition of the Second Amendment clearly supports state laws against the use or misuse of firearms with unlawful intent, but not the disarmament of the law-abiding citizen," he wrote.

    "The adoption of the Second Amendment was a freedom calculus decided long ago by our first citizens who cherished individual freedom with its risks more than the subservient security of a British ruler or the smothering safety of domestic lawmakers. The freedom they fought for was worth fighting for then, and that freedom is entitled to be preserved still," the judge added.

    California Governor Gavin Newsom decried the ruling, referring to Benitez as a "right-wing zealot with no regard to human life."

    "Wake up, America. Our gun safety laws will continue to be thrown out by NRA-owned federal judges until we pass a Constitutional Amendment to protect our kids and end the gun violence epidemic in America," Newsom posted to X.

    Benitez's order won't take effect for 10 days as California Attorney General Rob Bonta moves to get a stay on the ruling.

poll#201

Considering what real news is available for all to witness, and in great specificity, should one pursue what is true outside of the channeled realm of the corrupt corporate /legacy media, and: Is Institutionalized Corruption real, and is it a hindrance to sustaining our Constitutional Republic now, and for future generations of American citizens?

  Yes

  No

  Not sure

295 total vote(s)     What's your Opinion?

poll#164

It has been far too many years since the Woke theology interlaced its canons within the fabric of the Indoctrination Realm, so it is nigh time to ask: Does this Representative Republic continue, as a functioning society of a self-governed people, by contending with the unusual, self absorbed dictates of the Woke, and their vast array of Victimhood scenarios?

  Yes, the Religion of Woke must continue; there are so many groups of underprivileged, underserved, a direct result of unrelenting Inequity; they deserve everything.

  No; the Woke fools must be toppled from their self-anointed pedestal; a functioning society of a good Constitutional people cannot withstand this level of "existential" favoritism as it exists now.

  I just observe; with this thoughtful observation: What will happen "when the Vikings are breeching our walls;" how do the Woke react?

817 total vote(s)     What's your Opinion?