524
submitted 1 year ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

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.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Sir_Kevin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 year ago

I see, thanks for making that connection for me. To be clear, I'm not playing for either side. I'm just a realist. Not every issue or opinion has to be red or blue.

My point is that anyone can make a magazine or buy one from somebody who can. So a ban would be useless. The only people it would effect would be those who choose to obey.

For what it's worth, I think if everyone on the radical right were launched into the sun, the world would be a better place.

[-] jeremy_sylvis@midwest.social 3 points 1 year ago

I see, thanks for making that connection for me. To be clear, I’m not playing for either side. I’m just a realist. Not every issue or opinion has to be red or blue.

No worries at all, and agreed. It's part of why this is so incredibly frustrating - the sheer entrenched nature of this partisan-aligned wedge issue precludes any form of meaningful progress.

My point is that anyone can make a magazine or buy one from somebody who can. So a ban would be useless. The only people it would effect would be those who choose to obey.

Correct, and entirely agreed. This is the nature of the flaw with most such restrictions - unless there's compelling evidence the tools used for a given crime were sourced by legal owners, further restricting legal owners does absolutely no good.

For what it’s worth, I think if everyone on the radical right were launched into the sun, the world would be a better place.

I would wholly-support a MAGA-ectomy.

[-] PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

Everyone can sexually abuse minors and minors continue to be sexually abused. Does the pro-gun community advocate legalising sexually abusing children?

After all, it only effects those who choose to obey it.

For what it's worth, I think if everyone on the radical right were launched into the sun, the world would be a better place.

Gotta make sure the gun owners know who your murder fantasies are about. Meanwhile, back in reality, everywhere far-right is an absolute shithole and everywhere progressive absolutely smashes them as far as healthcare and happiness goes.

[-] jeremy_sylvis@midwest.social 3 points 1 year ago

Everyone can sexually abuse minors and minors continue to be sexually abused. Does the pro-gun community advocate legalising sexually abusing children?

After all, it only effects those who choose to obey it.

Could you help me understand how sexual abuse of minors is somehow related to firearms? I have serious concerns regarding the state of your mental health if you actually entertain the notion that people should be able to sexually abuse minors.

Gotta make sure the gun owners know who your murder fantasies are about. Meanwhile, back in reality, everywhere far-right is an absolute shithole and everywhere progressive absolutely smashes them as far as healthcare and happiness goes.

Does such a reality intersect at all with your hyperbole?

[-] PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

Could you help me understand how sexual abuse of minors is somehow related to firearms?

Probably not, since you'll just deliberately miss the point to try and deflect.

The pro-gun community routinely claims that gun laws are pointless because they'll just be broken anyway, a philosophy which is deeply stupid and morally reprehensible when applied to absolutely anything else, but they seem to think they logic is sound when it comes to gun laws.

Does such a reality intersect at all with your hyperbole?

Yes. Vastly more so than pro-gun promises to keep people safe from criminals and tyranny.

[-] jeremy_sylvis@midwest.social 2 points 1 year ago

Probably not, since you’ll just deliberately miss the point to try and deflect.

Ah, I see. You can't explain the canyon-crossing leap between the two because of the other person - it's totally not because you're connecting nonsense.

Neat.

The pro-gun community routinely claims that gun laws are pointless because they’ll just be broken anyway, a philosophy which is deeply stupid and morally reprehensible when applied to absolutely anything else, but they seem to think they logic is sound when it comes to gun laws.

I'm still looking for the connection to your bizarre obsession with the abuse of children. Did you have one?

This, aside from your absurd reduction of the rejection of ineffective laws which provide no benefit regarding the stated problems yet provide an pointless restriction on otherwise law-abiding citizens.

Yes. Vastly more so than pro-gun promises to keep people safe from criminals and tyranny.

I see we're still deep in the realm of works cited: crack pipe. Fair enough.

this post was submitted on 24 Sep 2023
524 points (100.0% liked)

News

23274 readers
2899 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS