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]@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Once more with the delicious irony.

      I’m interested in your thoughts on how I’ve elevated authoritarians; you seem to know quite a bit about who I’ve voted for… or to be talking out your ass once more.

      • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Generally if you support firearm ownership without stating nuance or conditions, it’s a high likelihood where you stand politically supports authoritarians, either willfully or via inaction.

        • Jeremy [Iowa]@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Ah, I see - criticism and correction of your misunderstandings is supporting firearm ownership without nuance - a thing of freedoms and rights; therefore I’m an authoritarian.

          With leaps like that, you could do gymnastics.

          • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Huh. You make up “alternate facts” to suit your argument. You’re one of ‘em all right.

            Freedom…your freedom to make the rest of the country suffer your hobby.

            • Jeremy [Iowa]@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Interestingly enough, only one of us has referenced relevant materials on the matter - you wouldn’t be projecting regarding your bullshit, would you?

              Certainly not.

              You may have had some ground to stand on there if you’d actually meaningfully engaged in the discussion and made an argument, perhaps provided actual criticism of addressed that made, but all you’ve managed to do is provide childish no, u!, insult, and deflection.

              Freedom…your freedom to make the rest of the country suffer your hobby.

              Fortunately, my hobby involves no harm to others and involves no items with agency or agenda of their own; it’s quite impossible for my hobbies to be the cause of anyone’s suffering.

              I would say the county suffers from quite the violence epidemic, though, and unlike you, I actually argue for addressing it rather than taking offense a specific tool is used to the neglect of the actual suffering.