Federal judge blocks California ban on high-capacity magazines

[Pappy Jones]

Ok, the thread title is a little inaccurate but I'm just using SacBee's headline. There is already a ban on the sale or transfer but whoever owned them when it went into effect was grandfathered in and allowed to keep them, this new law specifically targets them by criminalizing possession of them even if previously grandfathered in.

http://www.sacbee.com/news/state/article158965184.html

A federal judge has temporarily blocked a voter-approved California law that would have forced gun owners to get rid of high-capacity ammunition magazines by this Saturday.

U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez, who is based in San Diego, issued a preliminary injunction Thursday that found the law was likely unconstitutional because it prevented people from using firearms that employed “whatever common magazine size he or she judges best suits the situation.” The law would have barred people from possessing magazines containing more than 10 bullets.

“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.

To get rid of magazines in compliance with the approved law, California gun owners would have been allowed to move them out of state, sell them to a licensed dealer, destroy them or hand them over to law enforcement.

Ok, so I went to the Glock website as a representative of standard magazine capacities of different handgun/calibre sizes. Interesting that the only standard magazine sizes California would allow are for the most powerful, the 45, and the most concealable handguns. Seems like a back-door attempt at a gun ban to me, either get rid of your guns with a standard capacity of greater then 10, try to find a manufacturer that makes magazines with a lower possible capacity for your specific handgun, or modify them yourselves (which they would probably ban as a further preventive measure). Either way you are having your lawfully purchased property taken from you and will have to spend more money, out of your own wallet, to comply.

Here's the breakdown:

​

 

[SmarterthanYou]

just further proof that registration leads to confiscation