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
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    Do we need fully auto firearms? No not really.

    Sure, but it’s not really about need and there’s nothing meaningfully different about them.

    Guns should be registered.

    You’re going to see much resistance to the notion of the state owning a registry of every individual owning a firearm and what they own. Allow for the concept of a paper trail of transfers especially where private-party transfers are legal, allow those to request NICS checks, and you’ll probably be set.

    Lastly I know this is a stretch, but the US should be checking vehicles going to Mexico. Interesting that we only check coming back but not going. Firearms trafficking would be significantly reduced if we started checking.

    Alternatively, we could address the root of the problem: Between 70 to 90 percent of guns recovered at crime scenes in Mexico can be traced back to the U.S. Drug cartels - there are policy changes we could enact to defang drug cartels while also helping enable addicts to seek the support they need.

    • not_that_guy05@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      9 months ago

      Which is why I said need, not really. I am not saying to banned them either. We don’t need a lot of things in life, but doesn’t mean we don’t want them. Which also goes back to country folks having different needs compared to city folks. I get that there’s going to be a lot of resistance against it, there will always be resistance in everything.

      Yes I believe that manufacturers have a responsibility especially when they are making narco like firearms to cater to that kind of life. (Talking about all those gold, diamond, and graphic firearms.) (No I’m not talking about the laser ingrave grips LARPS want to get.)

      From reading your article, wouldn’t the serial registration also help prevent US drug cartels from spamming mexico with ghost guns, which could be traced back to crime organizations? Wouldn’t that dammed one of the toxic rivers and help bring attention too other rivers?

      • Jeremy [Iowa]@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        From reading your article, wouldn’t the serial registration also help prevent US drug cartels from spamming mexico with ghost guns, which could be traced back to crime organizations?

        The entire premise to the ghost gun fearmongering is the lack of traceability - “serial numbers” aren’t part of it.

        I somehow suspect a cartel manufacturing firearms isn’t going to bother registering it before trafficking it to Mexico. So, no - it would be entirely ineffective.

        • not_that_guy05@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          No, but it could stop some from buying from actual legal stores. If they are being manufactured illegal (ghost guns) that would be a different game plan. I am focusing more on the legal way to buy firearms and move them to Mexico. Like you said it is a multifaceted issue but repairing like cracks here there will help reinforce other parts of the issue.

          • Jeremy [Iowa]@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            9 months ago

            No, but it could stop some from buying from actual legal stores.

            That would be the entire point to the existing straw purchase legislation - which would be a better place to start, if such avenues are demonstrably the actual problem.

            Like you said it is a multifaceted issue but repairing like cracks here there will help reinforce other parts of the issue.

            Addressing symptoms will never be as effective as addressing root issues, you’ll just feel better about negligible impact. That’s the problem.