The Ninth Circle Appeals Court on Friday lifted California’s ban on high-capacity magazines on the grounds that its restrictions violated the second amendment – with the finding that it would criminalize half of the magazines in the US
State law prohibits owning large capacity magazines (LCMs) that last more than 10 rounds. The tribunal’s three-judge panel stated that while the law has a “laudable goal of reducing armed violence,” it must also conform to the constitution.
IN “DEFUND POLICE” CITIES WITH INCREASING CRIME, RECEIVING A RIFLE, NO EASY TASK: “IMPOSSIBLE TO OBTAIN PERMISSION”
“California’s almost categorical ban on LCMs violates the basic right to self-defense. Today it criminalizes the possession of half of all American magazines, ”declared the majority in a 2: 1 judgment.
“Illegal magazines are being produced, and law-abiding citizens often use them in handguns for self-defense. And it weighs heavily on the core right to self-defense guaranteed to people under the Second Amendment, ”wrote Judge Kenneth Lee in the majority opinion. “It can’t stand.”
Lee said while the law was passed “after heartbreaking and publicized mass shootings,” the law was too far-reaching.
It upholds a 2017 ruling by San Diego-based US District Judge Roger Benitez blocking a new law that would have banned gun owners from owning magazines with more than 10 bullets.
NRA’S POLITICAL SPENDING RISES AS LAWYERS, CONTROVERSIS HIT
But he and the appeals court went further and ruled unconstitutional a state law that had banned the purchase or sale of such magazines since 2000. That law had allowed those who previously owned the magazines to keep them, but prohibited new sales or imports.
California now has the option to ask the US Supreme Court to review the decision. There may also be a delay in implementing the decision to prevent purchases from rising
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
The ruling may also affect other states that have similar laws – although it only applies to western states due to the jurisdiction of the court.
Gun rights groups were keen to bring such a case to the Supreme Court, where there is currently a Conservative majority.