Posted July 3, 2017 9:38 am by Comments

By Josh Blackman Josh Blackman

In 2000, California banned the sale of firearm magazines that
can hold more than ten rounds. Residents who already possessed such
magazines were “grandfathered” in. Or at least that was the
promise.

Recently, Californians approved Proposition 63, which would have required all
grandfathered owners to surrender those magazines by July 1, 2017,
or face up to a year in prison. Civil-rights groups challenged the
confiscation in federal courts. With less than a day to spare,
Judge Roger T. Benitez of the Southern District of California
blocked the measure from going into effect. In his thoughtful opinion, he meticulously
deconstructs every strawman erected by gun-control advocates, who
can show no evidence that limiting magazine sizes will improve
public safety. No doubt this decision will be appealed, but the
higher courts should take note: Judge Benitez provided a clinic on
how to scrutinize laws that restrict Second Amendments rights.

In District of Columbia v. Heller, the Supreme Court
recognized that the Second Amendment protects an individual right
to keep and bear arms. That right is not limited to guns; it
extends also to the ammunition and magazines that make the gun
operable. California’s law directly infringes on that right, by
prohibiting law-abiding firearm owners from using their magazine of
choice for self-defense. Following Heller, lower courts
have held that …Read the Rest

Source:: Cato Institute

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *