Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Gun Control & RKBA

Showing Original Post only (View all)
 

Dial H For Hero

(2,971 posts)
Wed Dec 22, 2021, 11:12 AM Dec 2021

(California) Large-capacity gun magazine possession law on pause while Supreme Court petitioned [View all]

https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/courts/story/2021-12-21/gun-magazine-supreme-court

A federal appeals court has agreed to put on hold a law that makes it illegal to possess a gun magazine holding more than 10 bullets, to see if the U.S. Supreme Court takes up the case.

An en banc panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the law in a 7-4 ruling on Nov. 30. However, gun rights advocates who sued the state over the law in San Diego federal court said they plan to petition the Supreme Court in the case.

The 9th Circuit agreed on Monday to the advocates’ request to stay the possession part of the law for 150 days to allow time for the writ of certiorari to be filed. If the petition is filed during that period, the stay will be extended until the high court makes a determination on whether it will consider the case.

The state Attorney General’s Office, which is defending the law in court, did not oppose the request.

(Excerpt)
19 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
I've never really understood the logic of banning standard capacity magazines. PTWB Dec 2021 #1
The problem with your reasoning is that it comes down to AndyS Dec 2021 #4
"Arms" bucolic_frolic Dec 2021 #2
Are you saying that the 2nd amendment shouldn't cover modern arms? PTWB Dec 2021 #3
See? You're interpreting every bit as much as the courts must /nt bucolic_frolic Dec 2021 #5
I was asking what you were trying to say. PTWB Dec 2021 #6
The authors listed freedom of speech, but didn't foresee computers, yagotme Dec 2021 #7
The Internet isn't mentioned in the Constitution, either. PTWB Dec 2021 #8
Shoulder fired rocket launchers and suicide bombers with backpacks are also bearing arms bucolic_frolic Dec 2021 #9
And you can't falsely shout fire in a crowded movie theater. PTWB Dec 2021 #10
Thank you for phrasing that correctly. Dial H For Hero Dec 2021 #11
You're welcome. PTWB Dec 2021 #12
It's sad, though, that this verbiage came out of a terrible decision The Mouth Dec 2021 #16
A shoulder launched rocket would be fun to have/shoot, yagotme Jan 2022 #18
Responding here to the Founders intent. discntnt_irny_srcsm Dec 2021 #13
Compliment and comment . . . Surf Fishing Guru Dec 2021 #15
Thanks discntnt_irny_srcsm Dec 2021 #17
I consider this stay a concession . . . Surf Fishing Guru Dec 2021 #14
Vacated and sent back to the courts The Mouth Jul 2022 #19
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control & RKBA»(California) Large-capaci...»Reply #0