Quote of the day—Hon. Roger T. Benitez

Just as we would not allow “the police to search the sacred precincts of the marital bedrooms for telltale signs of the use of contraceptives,” (id.), we should not allow the police to search the private environs of law-abiding, responsible citizens for self-defense magazines that the State deems too large and dangerous.

Hon. Roger T. Benitez
United States District Judge
March 29, 2019
VIRGINIA DUNCAN, et al., Plaintiffs, v. XAVIER BECERRA, in his official capacity as attorney General of the State of California, Defendant
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, DECLARING CALIFORNIA PENAL CODE § 32310 UNCONSTITUTIONAL and ENJOINING ENFORCEMENT

[The adults are taking charge and telling the political left that the 2nd Amendment is part of the Bill of Rights and must be respected.

Amazing!—Joe]

10 thoughts on “Quote of the day—Hon. Roger T. Benitez

  1. “The adults are taking charge and telling the political left that the 2nd Amendment is part of the Bill of Rights and must be respected.”

    Only to the extent that this one judge seems to be an adult. In the last 40 years it has been evident that even when one or two ‘adults’ do the correct thing, they are outnumbered by the malicious tyrant wannabees.
    But the trend does seem to be towards the adults finally taking charge. Let’s just hope that the momentum in that direction continues and doesn’t get derailed before a return to sanity prevails.

    • It appears, from reading the judgement, that many of the judges DID want to be adults and treat the 2nd amendment as part of our Constitution, unfortunately, until _Heller_ the courts had ruled that there was no individual right to keep and bare arms. Thus nobody that brought a 2nd amendment claim to the 9th was even heard.

      This is where we are seeing Judges hearing and following what the plain language of the 2nd actually says. Because _Heller_ freed them to do so.

      • “the courts had ruled that there was no individual…” — that’s a standard gun grabber’s talking point, but it’s demonstrably false. For a whole lot of detail, see Neil Schulman’s “Stopping Power”.
        A typical case quoted by these liars is U.S. v. Cruikshank, where they quote a carefully chosen snippet from the opinion: “The right there specified is that of bearing arms for a lawful purpose. This is not a right granted by the Constitution.” But they omit the next line: “Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence.” since it utterly reverses the meaning from what they pretend it was.
        The same sort of false argument applies to many other examples often used by the other side. It’s worth avoiding these false talking points.

        • And the judges are right. “there is no individual right in the 2A”. and there was never intended to be one. 2A sez ” the right of the people shall not be INFRINGED”. because its a group right granted to every human alive on the planet. its a human right. everyone is born with the right to defend themselves. and the framers were telling the government that infringement was treason!

  2. Note that this ruling was nearly a month ago and the entire 86 page ruling is an amazing read. We will be pulling gems out of this ruling for the next 20+ years.

    Every gun grabbers dream reason is addressed and shot down(pun intended). The judge takes aim at the shoddy “studies” done by publications like _Mother Jones_ being used as “evidence”. Take the time to read what you can.

    Unfortunately, the State of California has asked for and been granted a stay in this judgement so the California magazine near ban is back in affect. The good news about the stay is that the Judge ruled that all those people that purchased mags while the ruling was in affect and before the stay was granted, including those that had purchased but not yet received those magazines, are safe from procession.

  3. Surely you jest. Another judge at the same level has ruled “[s]o far, the right not to be seen unclothed by the opposite sex is not on the Supreme Court’s list“, that girls have no right to “visual bodily privacy.”

    The law at this level is only a tool to enforce the tastes of our ruling class, who are restrained only by their sometimes realizing that if they go too far, we deplorables who they hate with a burning passion and are quite successfully ruining will flip our switch from “Vote” to “Shoot F**king Everybody” as Larry Correia put it. To which their latest reply is, we’ll nuke you.

    • Don’t get excited like Yaniv, bro. The judge is still letting the associated lawsuit from parents against the school go forward.

  4. Certain magazines are “illegal” depending on capacity and acquisition date, but we don’t have a clear means of enforcing. From the point of view of the authoritarian, that’s a desirable situation.

    Of course the left has done this before, and of course such “bans” never did anything but raise the price of certain magazines, and yet the leftists want to repeat it. On the surface it appears “illogical” or “stupid”, but trends show us there’s much more to it. In fact there are clear reasons for the “stupidity”.

    Looking at rhetoric verses behavior-over-time, we can flesh out the motives. There are three primary motives in all of this;

    1. General harassment and chilling the exercise of rights.
    2. Making as many people as possible into “law breakers” like them. The criminal class never wants to see a person with no possible “rap sheet”. It makes them nervous when their wickedness stands out in stark contrast, so they have an emotional need for everyone to join them in their condition of lawlessness.
    3. They have an overwhelming emotional, and financial, need to show us they have the “authority”, that they’re “in charge”. That alone is reason enough for any and all of the “stupid” things authoritarians in both parties, and around the world, do every day. This is possibly their Achilles Heel as well– Outside of their authoritarian play-acting roles, without the theatre, they are essentially worthless people (scant on marketable skills), and they know it, and it terrifies them.

    They’ll lie about it, naturally, but lies by definition have no bearing on the truth.

    Crime rate mitigation of course is not and has never been on the list. Rhetoric verses behavior-over-time, alone, proves these things beyond reasonable doubt, and we have more proofs besides. If anything, increasing crime rates serve the purposes and goals of authoritarians more often than not, “Ordo ab Chao” being one of their age-old slogans.

  5. The ruling is a tour de force of 2nd Amendment support. The ruling demolishes every anti-gun-rights argument presented by the state, and then some. The ruling demonstrates irrefutably that the only ruling possible under existing 2nd Amendment law is that the CA law limiting magazine size is unconstitutional.

    Therefore I await with some anticipation the 9th Circuit ruling which sides with the CA Attorney General. The contortions required to vitiate this decision will be enough to make even RBG sit up and take notice when it gets to the Supreme Court.

    • She is already embalmed in an upright position so she can continue to produce rulings even without a heartbeat.

      I earnestly pray for her death frequently so that good men can prevail against the evil in the world. God hears the petitions of the righteous man.

Comments are closed.