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.

  • Coach@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    39
    ·
    1 year ago

    Simple solution: tax the ever-loving fuck out of bullets. $1000 per. Call it a “true cost adjustment.”

      • JokeDeity@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        Well… I’m not seeing a ton of these mass shootings committed by the ultra wealthy, where are you seeing that?

      • stillwater@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        17
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        TIL the only form of self defence is bullets. Nothing else. Only bullets.

        Next time you’re walking down a sketchy alley, make sure you’ve got a pocket full of bullets!

        • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          Well, better than a knife that makes you get close to an armed attacker, and they don’t make holsters for baseball bats, tasers are 60% effective and that’s the ones the police can get that we can’t, and mace is for non-deadly threats, so you should have that too, but time and place

          • stillwater@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Even if I was the world’s foremost knife fighter, and took them all out, I’d be in legal trouble because I have no rights to self-defense if I don’t have bullets.

            • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Idk where you live, but afaik there isn’t a place where armed self defense is only legal with guns. Sucks if true, but then “you should change that.”

              • stillwater@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                I can only suggest you go back and read the comment I first responded to, and then see if my comments take on a new meaning.

          • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            A knife doesn’t make you come close to an attacker. You use it when the attacker comes close.

            The point of self defence is to defend, not to go out of your way to kill.

            • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Ok fair, I worded that poorly, I should have said “is only effective when the attacker gets in close enough proximity to stab, which puts you at undue risk of harm” but I didn’t think the Pedantic Police would be out, my mistake.

        • bobman@unilem.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          10
          ·
          1 year ago

          Well, if you can’t fight then a gun is your best option.

          Can you fight?

          Didn’t think so.

          • stillwater@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            What does it matter if I can fight? Without bullets, I have no right to self defense.

            • bobman@unilem.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              It matters because if you can’t fight, you’re going to lose to someone who can.

                • stillwater@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I’m the one being told I should have a gun, not the one saying I have a gun! Besides, the right to self-defense is all about bullets it seems, so as long as I can chuck bullets at the guy, I’ll be legally protected!

              • stillwater@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                I could be a kung fu master but apparently if I don’t have bullets, I have no right to self-defense, so I will be legally screwed either way!

      • Coach@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        1 year ago

        Who’s gonna shoot you if mini-missles cost a grand? Defend yourself with something else.

          • Coach@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            1 year ago

            And those people get arrested. What aren’t we understanding here? Selling weapons of war should be easier than smokes or booze? What kind of logic is that?

        • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          So if I don’t have $10,000 I can’t have a full mag with which to defend myself? $15,000 for one standard capacity at that?

          Yeah, “only rich people can defend themselves, you poors don’t deserve to live anyway.”

            • nxdefiant@startrek.website
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              the really shitty part is regulating suppressors. I wonder how cheap they’d actually be nowadays if it weren’t for the NFA.

              • Jeremy [Iowa]@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                6
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                There’s certainly an argument to be made that we’d be seeing much more innovation and availability if not for the sheer SOT sandbagging.

                It continues to blow my mind that basic hearing protection is somehow restricted especially when the countries the restrict/ban crowd loves comparing the US to generally consider suppressors to be essential equipment because of the sound reduction.

        • Bakkoda@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          Toys? This is the mentality that makes reform difficult. You are part of the problem, not the solution.

          There are those of us who use these tools exactly as they are meant to and really get annoyed at both the “AR at the grocery store” crowd and the “Thousand dollar bullets will show them” crowd.

        • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          Right so only rich people, got it. Gotta spend money to prove your life is worth protecting after all, if you have no money you might as well go ahead and be victimized and die, good riddance!

    • Jeremy [Iowa]@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      I wish you the best of luck with that. Poor taxes were the strategy behind the NFA - its incredible unpopularity guarantees it won’t make it through either branch of Congress let alone both.

      • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        If some of them die when working with explosives, I can only see it as a win.

        • RaoulDook@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          You seem like a pleasant individual, wishing death on those you disagree with views on Constitutional rights.

          FYI the powder used in manufacturing ammo is not explosive. Smokeless powder simply burns fast, and it’s generally safe and relatively easy to construct your own ammo at home. I have a couple of reloading presses at home, have made hundreds of cartridges of high quality ammo for cheaper than you can buy it. The cartridges that I produce with novice to intermediate level experience on the press are actually higher quality than factory ammo, unless you spend extra for the Match Grade stuff.

      • Coach@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        Better than the “profiteering off of the death of kids” community.

    • BaldProphet@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Ah yes, let’s just arbitrarily throw out the Bill of Rights and make it so that only rich people can access tools with which to protect themselves.

    • Bakkoda@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      18
      ·
      1 year ago

      What a brilliantly uneducated idea. Thanks for turning my hunting season into a 3k dollar minimum adventure instead of a cheap way for me to put food on my table.

        • RaoulDook@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          We do during bow season, and then we hunt with rifles during rifle season. It’s the best way to get more deer meat in the freezer.

      • JokeDeity@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        19
        ·
        1 year ago

        Oh fuck off. No one gives a flying fuck about your bloodlust beyond other psychos.

          • JokeDeity@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            9
            ·
            1 year ago

            It literally is when we live in this day and age. If you aren’t living in a tribe somewhere, the bottom line is, you do this because you want to end something’s life.

            • Jeremy [Iowa]@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              It literally is when we live in this day and age.

              I’ll be sure to inform my hunting friends we’re all full of bloodlust for our interest in filling the freezer with cheap, quality meat which also serves to provide population control for an invasive and damaging species because a rando on the Internet said so.

    • Draupnir@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      Says the guy who is vastly unaware of how many responsibly armed citizens they cross paths with on a daily basis, and who have demonstrably prevented mass shootings. You have no idea the hidden safety net you live under and yet you want it destroyed because of the few bad actors.

      • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        None, because I don’t live in a shithole where you need guns in order to feel safe in your own home.

      • Coach@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        And just in case you’re looking for your “good guys with a gun,” they’re all standing outside of a school, waiting and shitting their pants. It’s pathetic.

        • Jeremy [Iowa]@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’m not sure anyone - anyone - would argue police are “good guys”. If anything, they’re an active demonstration that those in power cannot be the only ones with firearms given the extent to which they maliciously misuse that power.

          But sure - use the incompetence and cowardice of a given police department as some absurd emotional appeal.

      • Coach@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yup. Yes. A few bad actors spoiled it for the rest of you. Waa waa waa…grow up. Y’all can’t figure out if guns are a hobby or a necessity, but you seem to always fall back on both points pretty quickly. It’s sad that your “interests” seem to threaten our very existence, yet you feel like you have some inalienable right to kill others. It’s extremely sad and disappointing. I suggest you grow up and find other ways to entertain yourself.

        • Jeremy [Iowa]@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Waa waa waa…grow up.

          Yikes, the projection.

          Y’all can’t figure out if guns are a hobby or a necessity, but you seem to always fall back on both points pretty quickly.

          Oh? I’m not sure how you interpreted their highlight of the sheer commonality of those legally carrying with no issue as either of these things.

          It’s sad that your “interests” seem to threaten our very existence, yet you feel like you have some inalienable right to kill others.

          I’m not sure how you feel threatened by the mere existence of inanimate objects. Even extrapolating to the action - that of homicide - I’m not sure how you’d feel threatened by such a thing, especially so disproportionately to its lack of prevalence related to the other ways you can be killed and their statistical likelihood.

          I’m also not sure how you interpret the right to bear arms - repeatedly highlighted for self-defense purposes in judgements and judge opinions - as somehow an inalienable right to kill others. Unless I’m missing something, that kill others part tends to result in the offender spending quite some time in prison.

          It’s extremely sad and disappointing. I suggest you grow up and find other ways to entertain yourself.

          You may wish to take your own advice - you seem unable to think beyond your own preconceived and irrational views on a thing, even aside from your demonstrated inability to consider how your criticisms and suggestions might apply to yourself rather hypocritically.