texashuntingforum.com logo
Main Menu
Advertisement
Affiliates
Advertisement
Newest Members
jljones527, CountryTime, Jimbo42, 3rdCoastHunter, Sgt.Augie
69818 Registered Users
Top Posters(All Time)
dogcatcher 110,270
bill oxner 91,250
SnakeWrangler 63,168
stxranchman 59,718
Gravytrain 45,848
RKHarm24 44,585
rifleman 44,461
BMD 41,232
Forum Statistics
Forums46
Topics602,322
Posts11,229,697
Members84,818
Most Online19,184
Feb 5th, 2020
Print Thread
Small win, but a win nonetheless #8012670 10/16/20 06:16 PM
Joined: Nov 2014
Posts: 6,746
M
mikei Online Content OP
THF Trophy Hunter
OP Online Content
THF Trophy Hunter
M
Joined: Nov 2014
Posts: 6,746
October 16, 2020
Gun News
Federal Appeals Court Blocks California's Ban on High-Capacity Magazines

www.usnews.com

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals on threw out a California law banning high-capacity ammunition magazines, ruling that the measure violates citizens' constitutionally protected right to bear arms.

The ban, passed in the wake of mass shootings, bars citizens from owning "large capacity magazines" that hold more than ten rounds of ammunition.

"Even well-intentioned laws must pass constitutional muster," Appellate Judge Kenneth Lee wrote for the three-judge panel's majority, ruling that the magazine ban "strikes at the core of the Second Amendment."

"California's law imposes a substantial burden on this right to self-defense... Its scope is so sweeping that half of all magazines in American are now unlawful to own in California," Lee wrote in the ruling.

The ruling was a split 2-1 decision, with Chief U.S District Court Judge Barbara Lynn, the third judge on the appellate panel, dissenting.

Re: Small win, but a win nonetheless [Re: mikei] #8017712 10/21/20 05:50 AM
Joined: Mar 2019
Posts: 666
GNTX Online Content
Tracker
Online Content
Tracker
Joined: Mar 2019
Posts: 666
Yeah, but don’t pop the cork on the champagne bottle just yet. AG Becerra came back ad asked for an En Banc hearing which will use a larger number of judges than just the 3. So, it could still go the wrong way. Fingers crossed they will still rule against the state on their appeal.

Re: Small win, but a win nonetheless [Re: GNTX] #8021318 10/23/20 08:15 PM
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,376
F
fadetoblack64 Offline
giddyup
Offline
giddyup
F
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,376
More court packing....................don't like the verdict, add more judges.


The sheep are so scared of the wolf, they forget it's the shepherd that eats or shears them.
Re: Small win, but a win nonetheless [Re: fadetoblack64] #8029180 10/29/20 06:13 PM
Joined: Nov 2017
Posts: 17,115
B
Biscuit Online Shocked
THF Celebrity
Online Shocked
THF Celebrity
B
Joined: Nov 2017
Posts: 17,115
Originally Posted by takewhatyoucan64
More court packing....................don't like the verdict, add more judges.


Yep

Re: Small win, but a win nonetheless [Re: Biscuit] #8030685 10/30/20 09:35 PM
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 2,081
H
Hunt Dog Online Content
Veteran Tracker
Online Content
Veteran Tracker
H
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 2,081
Originally Posted by Biscuit
Originally Posted by takewhatyoucan64
More court packing....................don't like the verdict, add more judges.


Yep


Nope, not court packing. The 9th Circuit is already appointed 29 Judgeships. It's pretty common after losing an initial decision to ask for an en banc, that doesn't always mean you will get it.

Previous Thread
Index
Next Thread

© 2004-2022 OUTDOOR SITES NETWORK all rights reserved USA and Worldwide
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.3