GREAT news for CA gun laws

[EmpirE231]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1294314315013554176

 

[RitcheyRch]

#MAGA

 

[hallett21]

So does that make immediately roll the laws back?

 

[fishing fool]

Kamala Harris is going to change that in 100 days. She said so........


MAGA.....

 

[EmpirE231]

So does that make immediately roll the laws back?

Where are our resident lawyers? I would assume more details to follow.... but being an armchair law man, I take it as "unconstitutional"..... meaning you can legally own any mag you want in CA. whether you had one from 50yrs ago, 5 years ago or buying new ones moving forward.

HUGE win for gun owners.

 

[PlanB]

Time to import some more mags in case there is a stay put on the rulling.

 

[EmpirE231]

Kamala Harris is going to change that in 100 days. She said so........


MAGA.....

would have to go to the supreme court at that point?

 

[HNL2LHC]

Nice to have good news for a change. Maybe this will be the beginning of change....not Obama change.

 

[pronstar]

It’ll be temporary so take advantage if/while you can.

The state will request an en banc hearing, with all justices of the court.
Then it’ll get overturned.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Xtrmwakeboarder]

Awesome news!

 

[sintax]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1294314315013554176

good news, but they'll just get a stay and tie this up in the SC for years, just like everything else.

 

[EmpirE231]

good news, but they'll just get a stay and tie this up in the SC for years, just like everything else.

lets hope not.... but this is the best CA gun news I have ever heard. a step back in the right direction. Also, if it goes to the supreme court, and we get another Trump judge in by then = win.

 

[RiverDave]

Did someone say MAGAzine?

 

[77charger]

Still need a couple more steps from what i understand.It aint completely lifted yet

 

[stokerwhore]

mags selling out everywhere in 3...2...1...

 

[mjc]

It’ll be temporary so take advantage if/while you can.

The state will request an en banc hearing, with all justices of the court.
Then it’ll get overturned.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I think this was the en banc hearing this was overturned last year and everybody bought magazines as fast as possible then.

 

[HB2Havasu]

Freedom Week, Part 2! Better buy as many High Capacity mags while you can before they have another stay after Newsome has the order appealed. You can read up on the original Freedom Week.

 

[Tooms22]

Where are my emails from companies that will ship?!?!?!

I got like 5 emails in an hour when the law for online sales was overturned for 24 hours.

 

[LowRiver2]

Time to import some more mags in case there is a stay put on the rulling.

Order now online

might be gone in 24 hours like the last ammo over ruling

I can get mags but glad others
Can now

 

[Ballyhoo]

Thee ruling today was by a 3 judge panel not the full 11 judge panel.

https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2020-08-14/9th-circuit-ends-california-ban-on-high-capacity-magazines

 

[was thatguy]

Kind of sad that this is considered a major victory in CA.
“hurry! We can order 10+ mags for a day!”

I mean, I get it, but damn.

 

[Deckin Around]

I got 2 100rnd dual drum mags in Parker last week, nice to know they might get to come to Cali.. The clear backs were 159.99 which is steep but they had 20+ in stock

 

[LargeOrangeFont]

Gun Mag Wherehouse's banner says they are aware of the situation and are working on it.

Just placed an order for delivery to AZ. Where I fully expect there to be a tragic boating accident where all is lost.

 

[gqchris]

Gun Mag Wherehouse's banner says they are aware of the situation and are working on it.

Just placed an order for delivery to AZ. where I fully expect there to be a tragic boating accident where all is lost.

Their website is not responding right now, they are getting bombarded I assume!

 

[LargeOrangeFont]

Their website is not responding right now, they are getting bombarded I assume!

Yea it took me 10 mins to place an order.

 

[pkrrvr619]

It still needs to pass some legal hurdles as judge B needs to lift the stay. However this is a positive move, but it doesn't mean freedom week 2.0 is in effect, yet.

 

[PlanB]

Order now online

might be gone in 24 hours like the last ammo over ruling

I can get mags but glad others
Can now

I should have stockpiled more before I retired.

 

[EmpirE231]

Kind of sad that this is considered a major victory in CA.
“hurry! We can order 10+ mags for a day!”

I mean, I get it, but damn.

well, we barely ever get any good news here in CA... hence the excitement.

 

[was thatguy]

well, we barely ever get any good news here in CA... hence the excitement.

Yeah I know. I did 19 years there.

They had their rules, I had mine.
But it did suck hiding my stuff that is legal virtually everywhere else.

Gotta log off for a bit...gonna shop ammo and magazines online... want some double stacks for my sigs...got my eye on a sweet .300 blackout upper pistol length as well.
All of which will be shipped, to my door, and is illegal on the other side of the lake.
it’s nice living in America again!

 

[lbhsbz]

I made a phone call to an FFL buddy....lots of packages and new hardware incoming

 

[dspracing]

My FFL posted that they interpreted the ruling as being lawful to own, but still not lawful to purchase....

 

[Xtrmwakeboarder]

Here is a little summary from one of the places I train at. Artemis Defense in Lake Forest. Steve is the owner and 2nd amendment attorney.

Duncan v Becerra Part Quatre



Today we were blessed with a decision by the three judge panel from the 9th Circuit in the case of Duncan v Becerra.

This is the case regarding the constitutionality of California Penal Code § 31310 (Standard Capacity Magazines)

Victoria Duncan did not like the fact that her standard capacity magazines had been made illegal by the machinations of the State, and had the temerity to sue the State!

Her case was heard by US District Court Judge Benitez (St. Benitez) who essentially decided that the entire law was unconstitutional. This ushered in “freedom week” where over 1.5 million magazines were purchased, gifted or manufactured in California. He also put a stay on his order knowing that the State would appeal it.

And the State did.

The case went before a three judge panel consisting of Judge Consuelo M. Callahan (hereby and forever referred to as Our Lady Callahan), Judge Kenneth K. Lee (Hereby and forever referred to as The Grand Lama Lee) and Judge Barbara M. G. Lynn…(She authored the dissent and will be forgotten by history)

The Grand Lama Lee authored the opinion where he fundamentally agreed with the analysis of St. Benitez, and actually laid it out a little better from a future precedence standpoint. (Since St. Benitez is a US District judge his ruling has no bearing on future cases. This decision out of the 9th Circuit is now controlling law….for the time being…more on that in a bit.)

His analysis was spot on. He said when a law is challenged that is purported to implicate the Second Amendment we need to follow a pathway to determine if it is Constitutional.

1. The “Two Pronged Test”

The question is first asked: (1) whether the challenged law burdens conduct protected by the Second Amendment and (2) if so, directs the courts to apply the appropriate level of scrutiny.

To answer prong one, we need to do a four pronged test: 1) Does the law regulate “arms”. 2) Are the regulated “arms” dangerous and unusual, then 3) is the regulation longstanding…(and thus presumptive lawful) and finally 4) is there any historical evidence in the record showing that the regulation affects rights that fall outside the scope of the Second Amendment. (If either of these last two are answered in the affirmative the law does not burden protected conduct and the inquiry ends)

If the law is show to burden the Second, and survives the four step analysis….then we move onto prong (2)

This requires two more questions to be asked: First…how “close” the challenged law comes to the core right of law-abiding citizens to defend hearth and home, and second…does the law substantially burden that right.

If the law does not strike at the core Second Amendment right then the proper level of review is “intermediate scrutiny”. If the answer to those questions is in the affirmative then we MUST use “Strict Scrutiny”.

For an “Intermediate Scrutiny” analysis the State must prove (1) the governments stated objected is significant substantial, or important, and (2) a reasonable fit between the challenged regulation and the asserted objective. (Lee does admit that his court has used varying language to describe intermediate scrutiny but that is the final analysis it must have some type of “bite” and be something above the lowest level of review…”rational basis”

For “Strict Scrutiny” (The highest standard) The Court must determine if there is a compelling State interest with no less restrictive alternatives available. This is an extremely high standard that rarely allows a statute to survive.

Grand Lama Lee said that Standard Capacity Magazines are protected by the Second Amendment, and that the law banning them completely requires a “Strict Scrutiny Analysis.”

Analyzing the case at bar he and Our Lady Callahan decided that § 32310 was and is unconstitutional.

My absolute favorite part came in a discussion of minorities needing access to standard capacity magazines because they are often not willing or able to utilize law enforcement, he wrote:

“Further, some people, especially in communities of color, do not trust law enforcement and are less likely - over 40% less likely, according to one study- to call 911 during emergencies. See 163 ong. Rec. S1257-58 (daily ed. Feb 16, 2017 (Statement of Sen. Kamala Harris)

Yes!!!!!

So….does this mean that you can now go out and buy Standard Capacity Magazines? Seemingly yes but there are a few caveats: 1) Out of State dealers need to agree to, and from what we have seen many have begun to ship orders. 2) This decision is not ultimately stayed when either the State ask for an En Banc review, or the Court itself asks for one Sua Sponte. 3) An odd chatter that the stay issued by St. Benitez originally is still in force. This one is especially head scratching since the original stay simple says it is enforce until final resolution of the appellate court…and we now have that.

So…we have a win…but it is subject to caveats.

For the mean time we need to thank all of the Attorneys involved….especially the the offices of Michele and Associates that helped Shepard this case through…and of course the California Rifle and Pistol Association, that helped fund this litigation. Folks…this type of litigation is expensive, and requires the constant passing of the hat. Please please please, reach out to the CRPA (https://crpa.org) and join and donate to the cause!

This is a victory…and one that deserves to be savored…but there is much work to do!

 

[adam909]

cant purchase them yet from my understanding.. Its a big win for us that live california.. Hopefully this will continue.. They need to adress the california hand gun roster. Its a freaking joke on what you can and cant buy for hand guns..

 

[Xtrmwakeboarder]

Brownells has a banner that they are shipping to CA, but the f'ing site keeps crashing

 

[DLC]

I got 2 100rnd dual drum mags in Parker last week, nice to know they might get to come to Cali.. The clear backs were 159.99 which is steep but they had 20+ in stock

just think if you bought 6 of those you could have a few for free, by selling a couple... they won’t be 159 any more more like 259...

 

[was thatguy]

just think if you bought 6 of those you could have a few for free, by selling a couple... they won’t be 159 any more more like 259...

That's kind of true with everything gun related now.

 

[WhatExit?]

How great would it be to have a bunch of 30-round 5.56 mags but I don't even have a gun

 

[Justsomeguy]

Here is a little summary from one of the places I train at. Artemis Defense in Lake Forest. Steve is the owner and 2nd amendment attorney.

Duncan v Becerra Part Quatre



Today we were blessed with a decision by the three judge panel from the 9th Circuit in the case of Duncan v Becerra.

This is the case regarding the constitutionality of California Penal Code § 31310 (Standard Capacity Magazines)

Victoria Duncan did not like the fact that her standard capacity magazines had been made illegal by the machinations of the State, and had the temerity to sue the State!

Her case was heard by US District Court Judge Benitez (St. Benitez) who essentially decided that the entire law was unconstitutional. This ushered in “freedom week” where over 1.5 million magazines were purchased, gifted or manufactured in California. He also put a stay on his order knowing that the State would appeal it.

And the State did.

The case went before a three judge panel consisting of Judge Consuelo M. Callahan (hereby and forever referred to as Our Lady Callahan), Judge Kenneth K. Lee (Hereby and forever referred to as The Grand Lama Lee) and Judge Barbara M. G. Lynn…(She authored the dissent and will be forgotten by history)

The Grand Lama Lee authored the opinion where he fundamentally agreed with the analysis of St. Benitez, and actually laid it out a little better from a future precedence standpoint. (Since St. Benitez is a US District judge his ruling has no bearing on future cases. This decision out of the 9th Circuit is now controlling law….for the time being…more on that in a bit.)

His analysis was spot on. He said when a law is challenged that is purported to implicate the Second Amendment we need to follow a pathway to determine if it is Constitutional.

1. The “Two Pronged Test”

The question is first asked: (1) whether the challenged law burdens conduct protected by the Second Amendment and (2) if so, directs the courts to apply the appropriate level of scrutiny.

To answer prong one, we need to do a four pronged test: 1) Does the law regulate “arms”. 2) Are the regulated “arms” dangerous and unusual, then 3) is the regulation longstanding…(and thus presumptive lawful) and finally 4) is there any historical evidence in the record showing that the regulation affects rights that fall outside the scope of the Second Amendment. (If either of these last two are answered in the affirmative the law does not burden protected conduct and the inquiry ends)

If the law is show to burden the Second, and survives the four step analysis….then we move onto prong (2)

This requires two more questions to be asked: First…how “close” the challenged law comes to the core right of law-abiding citizens to defend hearth and home, and second…does the law substantially burden that right.

If the law does not strike at the core Second Amendment right then the proper level of review is “intermediate scrutiny”. If the answer to those questions is in the affirmative then we MUST use “Strict Scrutiny”.

For an “Intermediate Scrutiny” analysis the State must prove (1) the governments stated objected is significant substantial, or important, and (2) a reasonable fit between the challenged regulation and the asserted objective. (Lee does admit that his court has used varying language to describe intermediate scrutiny but that is the final analysis it must have some type of “bite” and be something above the lowest level of review…”rational basis”

For “Strict Scrutiny” (The highest standard) The Court must determine if there is a compelling State interest with no less restrictive alternatives available. This is an extremely high standard that rarely allows a statute to survive.

Grand Lama Lee said that Standard Capacity Magazines are protected by the Second Amendment, and that the law banning them completely requires a “Strict Scrutiny Analysis.”

Analyzing the case at bar he and Our Lady Callahan decided that § 32310 was and is unconstitutional.

My absolute favorite part came in a discussion of minorities needing access to standard capacity magazines because they are often not willing or able to utilize law enforcement, he wrote:

“Further, some people, especially in communities of color, do not trust law enforcement and are less likely - over 40% less likely, according to one study- to call 911 during emergencies. See 163 ong. Rec. S1257-58 (daily ed. Feb 16, 2017 (Statement of Sen. Kamala Harris)

Yes!!!!!

So….does this mean that you can now go out and buy Standard Capacity Magazines? Seemingly yes but there are a few caveats: 1) Out of State dealers need to agree to, and from what we have seen many have begun to ship orders. 2) This decision is not ultimately stayed when either the State ask for an En Banc review, or the Court itself asks for one Sua Sponte. 3) An odd chatter that the stay issued by St. Benitez originally is still in force. This one is especially head scratching since the original stay simple says it is enforce until final resolution of the appellate court…and we now have that.

So…we have a win…but it is subject to caveats.

For the mean time we need to thank all of the Attorneys involved….especially the the offices of Michele and Associates that helped Shepard this case through…and of course the California Rifle and Pistol Association, that helped fund this litigation. Folks…this type of litigation is expensive, and requires the constant passing of the hat. Please please please, reach out to the CRPA (https://crpa.org) and join and donate to the cause!

This is a victory…and one that deserves to be savored…but there is much work to do!

Great analysis. Thank you for sharing. I hadn't had time to read the decision.