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.

    • Pratai@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      51 years old. I, nor anyone I know has ever been in a situation where a gun would have changed the outcome for the better. And while I know this is anecdotal as well, it’s a clear indicator to me that they’re unnecessary in day-to-day living.

      • Clarke @lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Bit rich of you to ask for facts and then give an antidotal argument when you don’t like my facts. But if you want antidotal evidence yes I have had to use a firearm in self-defense so because of that antidotal experience I would say that we should respect the rights of the citizenry to own firearms.

        • Pratai@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I guarantee you that that is utter bullshit. And no one you’ve ever known has ever needed one either.

      • Clarke @lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        If you’re 51 you’re the most immature 51-year-old I’ve ever had them misfortune to meet. Reading over your comments over the last day or two I would have to say it’s much more likely that you’re about 24. The entirety of your nuance prose and wit boil down to "Fuck you I’m right and your small and stupid because I said so. ". Is it any wonder you’re so popular in this thread and have so many supporters diving in with you.

        • Pratai@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          It’s “you’re.”

          And you’re one to talk. The fact that you seem to determine validity from the invalid based on worthless internet points clearly shows your maturity level.

          But since we’re there, let’s look at total comment scores shall we? Our accounts are the same age….

          How do you faire?

          • Clarke @lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Anyways, no I was not reading your comment score I was reading the comments that you were writing and I was analyzing the grammar and syntax that you were using to try to place your age.

            But if you want to go down that route firstly my account is less than a month old and yours is over 2 months old. But age does not mean much what matters is quality.

            you have a score of 9959 and you have made 1196 comments this means on average each comet you make is worth 8.3 points.

            I have 982 points and I’ve made 89 comments so each of mine is worth 11 points. So by your own chosen criteria yes I am better than you.

            If you factor in the number of posts it looks even worse for you… Do you concede?