Back in March, a judge ruled against California’s handgun safety requirements which prohibited new guns from being put on the roster in California.

Now, a judge has ruled against the high capacity magazine ban.

Federal judge again strikes down California law banning high capacity gun magazines

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. Democratic U.S. Attorney General Rob Bonta has already promised 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 truck down California’s law banning high-capacity magazines. The first time he struck it down — way back in 2017 — an appeals court ended up reversing his decision.

But last year, the U.S. Supreme Court set a new standard for how to interpret the nation’s gun laws. The new standard relies more on the historical tradition of gun regulation rather than public interests, including safety.

The Supreme Court ordered the case to be heard again in light of the new standards. It’s one of three high-profile challenges to California gun laws that are getting new hearings in court. The other two cases challenge California laws banning assault-style weapons and limiting purchases of ammunition.

Benitez ruled “there is no American tradition of limiting ammunition capacity.” He said detachable magazines “solved a problem with historic firearms: running out of ammunition and having to slowly reload a gun.”

“There have been, and there will be, times where many more than 10 rounds are needed to stop attackers,” Benitez wrote. “Yet, under this statute, the State says ‘too bad.’”


I hope the Bruen and other decisions keep piling up until onr day it will be legal for me to buy a submachinegun on a 4473 and carry it concealed without a permit down Rodeo Drive.

Spread the love

By J. Kb

5 thoughts on “California gun bans getting it good and hard”
  1. Screw the 4473. It’s unconstitutional too. I wanna walk down to the LGS and drop some cash and walk out with a brand new build M2. Only questions I want to answer is “how much ammo do you want today?”

  2. I look forward to the day when i can walk into the LGS, drop some cash and walk out with a nice can that will work for both my .22 LR rifle and pistol. I can dream, right?

  3. I’m not rightly sure how it is that you so thoroughly misspelled ‘in a blisterpack’ as ‘on a 4473’ but, well… there it is.


  4. Keep the champagne corked until you can buy 30 rounders at the Academy Sports in LA.

    I don’t know how many times I’ve read some variation of “Judge rules California gun control law unconstitutional” and yet they’re all still in effect.

Comments are closed.