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.

  • Jeremy [Iowa]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s like they’ve learned nothing from the attempted-privilege-making-poor tax that is the NFA.

    • nxdefiant@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      the really shitty part is regulating suppressors. I wonder how cheap they’d actually be nowadays if it weren’t for the NFA.

      • Jeremy [Iowa]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        There’s certainly an argument to be made that we’d be seeing much more innovation and availability if not for the sheer SOT sandbagging.

        It continues to blow my mind that basic hearing protection is somehow restricted especially when the countries the restrict/ban crowd loves comparing the US to generally consider suppressors to be essential equipment because of the sound reduction.