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.

    • Draedron@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      9 months ago

      Makes it so less magazines are put on the black market. Just like a total gun ban would dry up the black market. In US and Mexico.

        • PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          9 months 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.

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

              • nBodyProblem@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                9 months ago

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

                If your goal is to feel good about Doing Something then you are right. If the goal is to meaningfully reduce violence without curtailing the rights of law abiding citizens, you are dead wrong. The only effective way to go about this is to logically look at what the effect of a law would be.

                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.

                First of all, you are mistaken here. Guns used by criminal groups are most often straw purchases, which are very much illegal.

                More importantly, looking at the problematic people and just banning whatever they have in their hands has a long history of failing to make any meaningful impact on crime.

                As an example, let’s examine the long list of weapons banned in CA after the legislature associated them with “gang activity”. Martial arts tools like nunchucks, which have no practical use outside training, were banned, despite the fact that it should have been patently obvious that banning nunchucks would do zero to stop actual criminal activity.

                Another example is prohibition. People saw the “immoral element” consuming alcohol and saw alcohol prohibition as a panacea. It’s well known that prohibition had wide sweeping negative effects at this point.

                You have to predict the holistic effects of the law, long term, to see if it will have a positive impact.

                “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.

                … it kinda does

                It’s not just a “what if” question, either. Even prior to the advent of readily available 3d printing, criminals in Brazil and elsewhere had developed a network of facilities manufacturing black market open bolt sub machine guns based on the Luty designs. Restricting legal guns had little long term benefit in Brazil at stopping crime with firearms.

                It has only gotten easier to make them at home as time goes on. No manufacturing facilities needed.

                • PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  If your goal is to feel good about Doing Something then you are right. If the goal is to meaningfully reduce violence without curtailing the rights of law abiding citizens, you are dead wrong. The only effective way to go about this is to logically look at what the effect of a law would be.

                  Okay, so if it’s not a bullshit excuse to do nothing, what has the pro-gun community done to address the issue of gun violence over the last 25 years?

                  Oh look, they’ve done nothing. In fact, they’ve done worse than nothing because they’ve actually made it easier to enable criminals, abusive partners and domestic terrorists to arm themselves on a whim.

                  But despite this, they continue to insist they they and they alone have the answers and what a susprise, the answer is once again “don’t change anything”.

                  First of all, you are mistaken here. Guns used by criminal groups are most often straw purchases, which are very much illegal.

                  Okay, so you’re openly admitting that the current laws are a failure, but you’re also staunchly opposed to anyone fixing them. If your goal was to arm criminals and people who hit their wives, how would your actions differ from what you’re already doing?

                  You’re not going to allow straw purchases to be stopped, despite them being borderline non-existent in comparable countries. You’re not going to allow the gun show loop holes to be closed, despite them being openly acknowledged ways of buying guns without a background check. You’re definitely not going to support mandatory safe storage to punish dildos who leave handguns in gloveboxes, because those dildos are your friends.

                  More importantly, looking at the problematic people and just banning whatever they have in their hands has a long history of failing to make any meaningful impact on crime.

                  Yet more bullshit. “Oh look at this stupid ban or this thing law that didn’t work”. If those laws done work, go out and buy an RPG. Get a box of grenades without the appropriate license. Hell, pick yourself up a truck full of ANFO, I’ll cover the cost.

                  But you can’t, because it turns out banning precision engineered weaponry is actually easy as fuck.

                  You have to predict the holistic effects of the law, long term, to see if it will have a positive impact.

                  Is that your excuse for 25 years of the “good guys with guns” accomplishing absolutely nothing except lining the pockets of Republicans and lobby groups? You’re still looking at the holistic, long term effects of the laws that just happen to be the most personally convient to you.

                  Restricting legal guns had little long term benefit in Brazil at stopping crime with firearms.

                  And should we use the same dogshit, pro-gun logic for all laws? It’s illegal to fuck kids, but people fuck kids anyway, so by pro-gun logic it should be legal to fuck kids after a 2 day waiting period.

                  It’s illegal to drive while intoxicated, but that’s probably super inconvenient for some people so by pro-gun logic it should be allowed as long as their on their way to or from a gun show.

                  It’s illegal to kill people, but… Oh nevermind, judging by the murder fantasies on most pro-gun platforms, they’d be throbbing at the idea of those laws getting changed.

                  It has only gotten easier to make them at home as time goes on. No manufacturing facilities needed

                  Oh well you’ll be all set without your guns then. If any authoritarian dictatorships come along, all the pro-gun people who promised to protect us from it (but wouldn’t even wear masks in a pandemic) can just grab a $200 PLA printer from AliExpress and print themselves off a machine gun.

                  Right after they finish enthusiastically voting for them and losing 130lbs of course.

                  • nBodyProblem@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    9 months ago

                    Oh look, they’ve done nothing.

                    I mean, have you asked yourself why? There was once a time that gun control wasn’t a partisan issue and those with knowledge of guns openly supported new restrictions. Gun advocacy groups were actively involved in helping to write the legislation.

                    What changed? The thing that changed is that those who were afraid of any and all guns fought tooth and nail to prevent the laws that didn’t work from being walked back. The gun owners were called names and accused of heinous things for having a different opinion. The result has been that restrictions continually get tighter, even when they clearly are not doing anything to help the situation. After a century of this, the knee jerk response is to try to prevent any and all gun control.

                    Look at your posts here. You have called me names and are assuming a whole lot of things about my views based on a few comments. I have done far more to advocate for liberal causes at a grassroots level than 99% of the people on here. I wager this includes yourself.

                    I have been a part of political activism for everything from ending marijuana prohibition to seeing the end of bans on gay marriage. I advocated for BLM and mask restrictions during the pandemic. I have ended up on the front page of the news chained to city hall in defense of liberal causes. You see that I disagree with you one one small thing and just start spewing hate.

                    In order for this to work we need actual meaningful discourse from both sides, and realistically both pro and anti gun people fail miserably at this because of how far things have devolved.

                    I think the first step in building mutual trust on this issue would be to accept some lessening of restrictions on the laws that don’t work. Take suppressors off of the NFA list, for example. Stop calling for an assault weapons ban when we previously had one and the FBI’s analysis showed it had zero meaningful impact. Maybe then we can actually talk to each other in a cooperative manner to make progress.

          • Vytle@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            9 months 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]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                9 months 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.

                  • Jeremy [Iowa]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    9 months ago

                    I believe we’re still waiting for you to show guns are somehow the problem.

      • sudo22@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        9 months ago

        How’d that work out for the drug bans? Cause man I could buy so much weed in college (in an illegal state), and trust me I literally never asked.

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

                  And you clearly didn’t get mine. You print yourself an RPG and fire it. Use an actual 3D printer that you actually own, print yourself an RPG (and whatever ammo you need for it), hold it in your own hands and fire it.

                  People have walked on the moon. You can link a YouTube video of it and pretend you totally could too if you wanted to.

                  • sudo22@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    9 months ago

                    No? I don’t want one, and that’s mainly because I don’t have the land to test it. Its something I want to do one day once I own significant acherage.

                    I have however, printed fully functional firearms (G19x, FGC-9, AR-15, others). An RPG is well within feasibility of modern desktop printers. Look on YouTube or FossCAD on Reddit if you don’t believe me. RPGs, Grenade Launchers, Silencers, full guns, and plenty other improvised weapons are fully printable with plenty of examples online. And perfectly legal for most US citizens to make.

      • UPGRAYEDD@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        19
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        I mean… if you really cared, its a few hour drive to a state where you can legally buy them. Its not a large burden, and could be done in an afternoon.

        Edit: i like the downvotes this comment gets, as if its some sort of morality claim. Its just a fact. Im not personally pro gun, however i dont think the solution is an easy all guns are bad all the time. Its a very complex issue in america.

        However, i am very against political theater, California isnt going to to fix gun problems unless they can outlaw handguns, which are used in more than 90% of all gun related crimes. Just like they arnt going to fix water shortages by stopping people watering their lawns or washing cars when around 95% or the water usage is corporations.

        • lud@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          9 months ago

          I guess they meant “total” as in total ban country wide.

          Guess why Mexico has a huge problem with guns. Because they are smuggled from the USA.

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

          Damn, sounds like gun laws don’t work then. Better change them to increase background checks and waiting periods.

          • Vytle@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            9 months ago

            Yeah and what are you wanting to regulate 3d printers and 80% lowers while your at it? gonna regulate sheet metal to prevent people from making guns?

            • PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              9 months ago

              I don’t need to, because nobody is using them for mass shootings. But sure, I will absolutely advocate laws regarding the illegal manufacturing of firearms are enforced. I’ll also laugh when people blow their hands off.

              Fortunately since 3D printed guns don’t line the pockets of Republicans, lobbyists, sleazy PR companies and the people who simp for them, there should be no issue at all actually addressing the problem.

              If that problem ever actually exists of course. Isn’t it just fascinating that despite the entire world having access to 3D printers, they still don’t have gun violence that’s even remotely comparable to America? All of these comments saying

              It’s almost like “but 3D printers!” is just as bullshit as everything else that comes out of pro-gun groups mouths. 25 years of insisting it was doors or video games or rap music.

              • Jeremy [Iowa]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                9 months ago

                I don’t need to, because nobody is using them for mass shootings.

                Ah, I see - you don’t care about the dead children, but rather that firearms are used to kill children. That’s really fucked up.

                Fortunately since 3D printed guns don’t line the pockets of Republicans, lobbyists, sleazy PR companies and the people who simp for them, there should be no issue at all actually addressing the problem.

                I’m not sure if you’re aware or not but blue team has been decrying the evils and supposed impact of these things for multiple election cycles due to their inability to actually address that perceived problem.

                If that problem ever actually exists of course. Isn’t it just fascinating that despite the entire world having access to 3D printers, they still don’t have gun violence that’s even remotely comparable to America? All of these comments saying

                I’d be interested in seeing you compare such countries by violence overall and then again compare them by available social support and safety nets.

                It once more seems you only care that suffering involved a firearm rather than actually caring about people and their suffering.

                • PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  Ah, I see - you don’t care about the dead children, but rather that firearms are used to kill children. That’s really fucked up.

                  Thoughts and prayers for whatever point you thought you had.

                  I’m not sure if you’re aware or not but blue team has been decrying the evils and supposed impact of these things for multiple election cycles due to their inability to actually address that perceived problem.

                  And “team red” takes $16 million a year from the gun lobby and are adamant the solutions just coincidentally align with what’s most profitable.

                  I’d be interested in seeing you compare such countries by violence overall and then again compare them by available social support and safety nets.

                  Of course you would be, because you’re looking for excuses to do nothing, especially excuses that might take decades to prove wrong.

                  But whatever “social support and safety nets” you find are still going to be paired with vastly better gun laws that try and balance social risk rather than protect profits.

                  You want a half solution that doesn’t impact you, not an actual solution.

                  • Jeremy [Iowa]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    9 months ago

                    And “team red” takes $16 million a year from the gun lobby and are adamant the solutions just coincidentally align with what’s most profitable.

                    Ah, I see we’re forgetting about Bloomberg and his profiteering off of sensationalism of violence.

                    Of course you would be, because you’re looking for excuses to do nothing, especially excuses that might take decades to prove wrong.

                    Feel free to highlight any comment I’ve made where I suggest doing nothing.

                    Take all the time you need.

                    You want a half solution that doesn’t impact you, not an actual solution.

                    In point of fact, I quite explicitly argue for actual solutions.

          • Vytle@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            Work cited: crack pipe. You cant legally buy a glock switch, and there are plenty of exanples of glocks with switches on them (which usually come from china), and seeing as the ATF considers the switch themselves to be a machine gun, these are guns that were never legal, and yet theres an ungodly number of them on the streets

    • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      not only this, but lets be honest here, it does absolutely nothing to reduce the lethality of firearms. Even if an active shooter abides it; most people who’ve spent a modicum of time practicing can drop and replace a magazine inside of a second or two.

      Also, as Upgrayedd noted… you can drive a couple hours to arizona to get them. Or, just make your own mags. it’s not hard.

      I’m all for effective gun control laws… but this ain’t it.

        • Jeremy [Iowa]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          9 months ago

          It was an attempted dunk based on the assumptive chain that you defended a stricken-down firearms restriction therefore are clearly conservative, therefore clearly push abortion bans.

          It’s if it’s impossible to them that anyone outside the NRA can like firearms.

          • vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            9 months ago

            The NRA has been a trvesty for the firearms community. Also fuck em and fuck Reagan for banning open carry cause of the black panthers. Bunch of fucking cowardly welps.

          • Sir_Kevin@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            I see, thanks for making that connection for me. To be clear, I’m not playing for either side. I’m just a realist. Not every issue or opinion has to be red or blue.

            My point is that anyone can make a magazine or buy one from somebody who can. So a ban would be useless. The only people it would effect would be those who choose to obey.

            For what it’s worth, I think if everyone on the radical right were launched into the sun, the world would be a better place.

            • Jeremy [Iowa]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              9 months ago

              I see, thanks for making that connection for me. To be clear, I’m not playing for either side. I’m just a realist. Not every issue or opinion has to be red or blue.

              No worries at all, and agreed. It’s part of why this is so incredibly frustrating - the sheer entrenched nature of this partisan-aligned wedge issue precludes any form of meaningful progress.

              My point is that anyone can make a magazine or buy one from somebody who can. So a ban would be useless. The only people it would effect would be those who choose to obey.

              Correct, and entirely agreed. This is the nature of the flaw with most such restrictions - unless there’s compelling evidence the tools used for a given crime were sourced by legal owners, further restricting legal owners does absolutely no good.

              For what it’s worth, I think if everyone on the radical right were launched into the sun, the world would be a better place.

              I would wholly-support a MAGA-ectomy.

            • PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              9 months ago

              Everyone can sexually abuse minors and minors continue to be sexually abused. Does the pro-gun community advocate legalising sexually abusing children?

              After all, it only effects those who choose to obey it.

              For what it’s worth, I think if everyone on the radical right were launched into the sun, the world would be a better place.

              Gotta make sure the gun owners know who your murder fantasies are about. Meanwhile, back in reality, everywhere far-right is an absolute shithole and everywhere progressive absolutely smashes them as far as healthcare and happiness goes.

              • Jeremy [Iowa]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                9 months ago

                Everyone can sexually abuse minors and minors continue to be sexually abused. Does the pro-gun community advocate legalising sexually abusing children?

                After all, it only effects those who choose to obey it.

                Could you help me understand how sexual abuse of minors is somehow related to firearms? I have serious concerns regarding the state of your mental health if you actually entertain the notion that people should be able to sexually abuse minors.

                Gotta make sure the gun owners know who your murder fantasies are about. Meanwhile, back in reality, everywhere far-right is an absolute shithole and everywhere progressive absolutely smashes them as far as healthcare and happiness goes.

                Does such a reality intersect at all with your hyperbole?

                • PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  Could you help me understand how sexual abuse of minors is somehow related to firearms?

                  Probably not, since you’ll just deliberately miss the point to try and deflect.

                  The pro-gun community routinely claims that gun laws are pointless because they’ll just be broken anyway, a philosophy which is deeply stupid and morally reprehensible when applied to absolutely anything else, but they seem to think they logic is sound when it comes to gun laws.

                  Does such a reality intersect at all with your hyperbole?

                  Yes. Vastly more so than pro-gun promises to keep people safe from criminals and tyranny.

                  • Jeremy [Iowa]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    9 months ago

                    Probably not, since you’ll just deliberately miss the point to try and deflect.

                    Ah, I see. You can’t explain the canyon-crossing leap between the two because of the other person - it’s totally not because you’re connecting nonsense.

                    Neat.

                    The pro-gun community routinely claims that gun laws are pointless because they’ll just be broken anyway, a philosophy which is deeply stupid and morally reprehensible when applied to absolutely anything else, but they seem to think they logic is sound when it comes to gun laws.

                    I’m still looking for the connection to your bizarre obsession with the abuse of children. Did you have one?

                    This, aside from your absurd reduction of the rejection of ineffective laws which provide no benefit regarding the stated problems yet provide an pointless restriction on otherwise law-abiding citizens.

                    Yes. Vastly more so than pro-gun promises to keep people safe from criminals and tyranny.

                    I see we’re still deep in the realm of works cited: crack pipe. Fair enough.