Federal judge issues temporary stay for California's high-capacity magazine ban

A federal judge in San Diego has issued a temporary stay against a new California law that bans high-capacity magazines.

U.S. district judge Roger Benitez issued the preliminary injunction against the voter-approved law, writing that the law is likely to be unconstitutional because it prevents citizens from purchasing "whatever common magazine size [they judge] best suits the situation." 

Sacramento Bee:

"The State of California's desire to criminalize simple possession of a firearm magazine able to hold more than 10 rounds is precisely the type of policy choice that the Constitution takes off the table," the injunction read.

Benitez added that "a final decision will take too long to offer relief, and because the statute will soon visit irrevocable harm on Plaintiffs and all those similarly situated a state-wide preliminary injunction is necessary and justified to maintain the status quo."

The judge granted the request of attorneys from the National Rifle Association-affiliated California Rifle & Pistol Association to temporarily block the law.

In the days leading up to the ban, some California gun owners, pro-gun sheriffs and sellers have been reluctant to give up their magazines. Some gun owners have previously said that they were hoping pending court challenges would block the ban.

"We're not going to be knocking on anybody's door looking for them," said Shasta County Sheriff Tom Bosenko in an earlier interview with The Bee. "We're essentially making law-abiding citizens into criminals with this new law."

Kudos to the judge for some first-class reasoning.  We now know there is at least one federal judge who has read and understood the Second Amendment.

And Sheriff Bosenko has it exactly right.  The notion that this would make anybody in California safer is absurd.  Are proponents of the ban arguing that criminals will also turn in their illegal magazines and promise not to buy any more? 

Like almost all gun control measures, the high-capacity magazine ban was designed to make it appear that politicians are "doing something" about crimes committed with guns, despite the fact that there is zero chance and zero evidence that it will reduce violence.  Criminals don't need permission to purchase any weapon or magazine they want to, and they certainly won't be deterred by laws that end up "making law-abiding citizens into criminals."

A federal judge in San Diego has issued a temporary stay against a new California law that bans high-capacity magazines.

U.S. district judge Roger Benitez issued the preliminary injunction against the voter-approved law, writing that the law is likely to be unconstitutional because it prevents citizens from purchasing "whatever common magazine size [they judge] best suits the situation." 

Sacramento Bee:

"The State of California's desire to criminalize simple possession of a firearm magazine able to hold more than 10 rounds is precisely the type of policy choice that the Constitution takes off the table," the injunction read.

Benitez added that "a final decision will take too long to offer relief, and because the statute will soon visit irrevocable harm on Plaintiffs and all those similarly situated a state-wide preliminary injunction is necessary and justified to maintain the status quo."

The judge granted the request of attorneys from the National Rifle Association-affiliated California Rifle & Pistol Association to temporarily block the law.

In the days leading up to the ban, some California gun owners, pro-gun sheriffs and sellers have been reluctant to give up their magazines. Some gun owners have previously said that they were hoping pending court challenges would block the ban.

"We're not going to be knocking on anybody's door looking for them," said Shasta County Sheriff Tom Bosenko in an earlier interview with The Bee. "We're essentially making law-abiding citizens into criminals with this new law."

Kudos to the judge for some first-class reasoning.  We now know there is at least one federal judge who has read and understood the Second Amendment.

And Sheriff Bosenko has it exactly right.  The notion that this would make anybody in California safer is absurd.  Are proponents of the ban arguing that criminals will also turn in their illegal magazines and promise not to buy any more? 

Like almost all gun control measures, the high-capacity magazine ban was designed to make it appear that politicians are "doing something" about crimes committed with guns, despite the fact that there is zero chance and zero evidence that it will reduce violence.  Criminals don't need permission to purchase any weapon or magazine they want to, and they certainly won't be deterred by laws that end up "making law-abiding citizens into criminals."

RECENT VIDEOS