Score another one for the Second Amendment!
The National Rifle Association reports that a federal judge has granted an injunction against California’s extreme new ban on possessing magazines that hold more than a paltry ten rounds.
Duncan v. Becerra sees the California Rifle & Pistol Association challenging the law, Proposition 63, with the support of the NRA. US District Judge Roger Benitez said the suit is likely to succeed for one simple reason: “public safety interest may not eviscerate the Second Amendment.”
If allowed to remain in effect, the law would have subjected Californians to fines and possibly even prison for owning perfectly-normal ammo magazines that fit no definition of excessive whatsoever. Accordingly:
“If this injunction does not issue, hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of otherwise law-abiding citizens will have an untenable choice: become an outlaw or dispossess one’s self of lawfully acquired property,” Benitez wrote. “That is a choice they should not have to make.”
The case challenges California’s restrictions on standard capacity magazines on the grounds that it violates the Second Amendment, due process clause, and takings clause of the United States Constitution.
As a result of the injunction, California gun owners will not be required to surrender or permanently alter their lawfully owned property by July 1. Instead, the injunction preserves the “status quo” while the constitutionality of the law is decided by the court.
The NRA notes that the magazine ban is just one of several gun-control measures California passed last year, which have been collectively dubbed “gunmageddon.” Thankfully, a sane jurist appears to have canceled the Second Amendment apocalypse…for now.