10-round magazine limit ruled unconstitutional!!!!

This has been a bad couple of weeks for the political left and this is an awesome way to cap it off:

9 thoughts on “10-round magazine limit ruled unconstitutional!!!!

  1. Please let the get to SCOTUS. I hope that AG is stupid enough to appeal.

    As a former Californian, I’ve long given up hope for that lost state. Truly it’s shocking to see something like this ruling to come out.

    • Of course California will appeal.
      The Circuit that will hear the appeal isn’t called the “9th Circus” and known for its anti-gun bias, for nothing.

      This is “Round One”.
      And we all should pray that Justice Ginsberg is translated ASAP to her reward in the hereafter so President Trump can nominate her replacement.

  2. And this comes out just as the legislature in Oregon is considering banning magazines larger than 10 rounds.

    What timing! 😀

  3. I would only change that wording to self defense limiting, reduced capacity magazines

  4. What’s interesting is that there was a hushed up scandal in the Ninth Circuit. Turns out that the clerk’s office was putting Judge Stephen Reinhardt on politically sensitive appellate panels far more often than random selection would allow.

    Now that the clerk’s office is cleaned up, and Reinhardt is dead, it may be that some of the leftward tilt of the Ninth Circuit will evaporate.

    As an aside, the Supreme Court recently struck down a Ninth Circuit decision holding that Reinhardt could not “sign” an opinion creating a majority a week after his death.

  5. Wow.

    TL;DR version:

    The defendant’s reasoning hold no water, collectively and when considered individually.
    The defendant’s ‘evidence’ supports the plaintiff’s position.
    The defendant’s legal reasoning is garbage on multiple authoritarian counts.
    Ballot initiatives are due no judicial deference.
    Magazines larger than 10 round capacity are ‘arms’ within the meaning of the Second Amendment.
    Knock it off, and tell everyone you know to knock it off.
    Regardless of defendant’s opinion of plaintiff’s genitalia, plaintiff’s sexual potency is superior to defendant’s in all regards. (Had to read between the lines for this.)

  6. “Ballot initiatives are due no judicial deference.”
    I really hope that helps the challenge of that “everything is an assault rifle” crap initiative here in WA.

Comments are closed.