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.

  • PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    Nobody gives a fuck what criminals and terrorists could hypothetically use, they care about what they are using, which in nearly 80% of mass shootings is a legal firearm.

    • Vytle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      “Mass shooting” refers to any shooting where 3 or more people are injured, and it usually happens in areas with high unemployment. Kinda sounds like a class issue to me.

        • Jeremy [Iowa]@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          You have it backwards - fix the class issues and you’ll have nothing to bitch about regarding firearms.

          That is, unless you just hate firearms.

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

                Yep, we know. It’s the climate change denier strategy. However much evidence there is, demand even more before you’ll consider acting.

                But who gives a shit if you’re ever convinced? We can just build something without your rubber stamp of approval and you can join the ranks of people who opposed things like food safety and DUI laws.

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

                  Yep, we know. It’s the climate change denier strategy. However much evidence there is, demand even more before you’ll consider acting.

                  Arguably, we’re still waiting for any evidence at all supporting the notion it’s the firearms that are the root of the violence problem rather than merely the implement used.

                  The analog here would be that you seem to only care climate change can be caused by residential cars to the complete neglect of the fossil fuel contributions of the energy industry.

                  But who gives a shit if you’re ever convinced? We can just build something without your rubber stamp of approval and you can join the ranks of people who opposed things like food safety and DUI laws.

                  Feel free to find any support for the notion that I - or others here - have opposed such things.

                  Take all the time you need.

                  When you’ve accepted failure, consider adopting positions which may actually address root issues here rather than continuing to clutch your pearls most tightly about those darned firearms.

    • nBodyProblem@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      It’s relevant to the question of what would happen in the event of a gun ban.

      At this stage, anyone with sufficient desire to do so can manufacture an effective and reliable firearm using readily available tools at home, using no purpose built firearm components. Magazines are dead simple in comparison.

      • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, and if a police see someone with a gun, especially 3d printed, they know they are criminals without having to check the serial number.

      • PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        No it’s not, it’s a bullshit excuse to do nothing.

        Overwhelmingly, criminals, abusers and domestic terrorists are using legally purchased firearms to kill innocent people. Of the minority remaining that are using illegal firearms, they were stolen from somewhere and those people should be held accountable.

        Those are the people “gun grabbers” are trying to disarm and those are the people the pro-gun community is protecting, while somehow thinking they’re the good guys.

        “Oh but what about 3D printed guns and bombs and cars? They’ll just use them instead” doesn’t matter. They’re not using 3D printed guns any more than they’re using giant clown hammers.

        And do you know what we’ll do if they start? We’ll address it.

        Much like we have addressed it, since it doesn’t take 25 years to do when there isn’t a well funded death cult blocking us every step of the way.