Analysis? We Don’t Need No Stinking Analysis!

Quote of the Day

There are good arguments to be made, but the court didn’t offer them.

Adam Winkler
UCLA law professor
October 11, 2023
9th Circuit stays ruling against California ban on high-capacity ammunition magazines

The 9th Circuit put a stay on striking down of the “high-capacity” magazine ban. I found it interesting they didn’t analyze the law as per Bruen. As pointed out by Winkler, no friend of gun owners, they didn’t even put effort into making the best arguments for the anti-gun side. They seems to have said, “This law is good. Therefore it shall remain in effect.”

I suspect they knew, at least as some level, if they tried to arrive at their desired result via an articulated Bruen analysis they knew they would look even more stupid, ignorant, and/or evil than they do without doing the analysis. By saying,

“public interest tips in the favor of a stay,” as “mass shootings nearly always involve large-capacity magazines.”

They are engaged in interest balancing. But as pointed out by SCOTUS in two different rulings, the Second Amendment is the result of balancing the potential harms versus the good. No further balancing is allowed.


7 thoughts on “Analysis? We Don’t Need No Stinking Analysis!

  1. How much of a favor did the Ninth do gun owners with this ruling? It’s hard to see more lazy, half-assed deliberately insubordinate legal arguments intended to demand the the SCOTUS than this. Kagan would ‘t entertain a emergency appeal, but then any justice could take it.

  2. Were supposed to follow rulings by people that can’t follow their own superiors decisions? And therefor all actions taken under it as criminal and not-with-standing?
    All they have left to them is naked aggression. Nothing legal to it.
    Truly, what can we expect from people so ignorant that not only Heller and Bruen escape them. But lack the reading comprehension and understanding of “The right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed”.
    And not just them. The courts in general have lacked it for close to 90 years now.
    The 9th. should try this one as a maximum of jurisprudence. “Hypocrisy justifies no acts.” (Less they be known as dumb motherf–kers and ignored for the cerebral monsters/criminals they are.)

  3. “It’s too late to fix the system through the system” -wolfe

    Post Bruen, the magazine ban’s days are numbered, but they’ll just keep passing more and more unconstitutional laws faster than the courts can shut them down.
    While they’re delaying the inevitable collapse of the mag-ban, CA has noted that Bruen does not stop the state from prohibiting carry in federal buildings, schools, etc. so they’ve opted to increase that list to include parking lots and sidewalks, etc… effective Jan 2024.

    This guy says it will effectively outlaw concealed carry in the entire state of CA.

    It will be ruled unconstitutional, of course, perhaps years later, but by then there’ll be four new laws overlapping that one.

    People are going to defend themselves. They have no choice as crime and violence rises. Now they’ll have to accept being criminals to do so, which means they’re less likely to submit to law enforcement. Violence in CA is about to exponentiate. Law enforcement will have to move their families into protected enclaves, and suffer attrition. Mail in voting has been massively expanded, and hand counting outlawed. You won’t be fixing this by voting. Political power issues from the barrel of a gun.

  4. I look forward to the day when I can legally buy belt-fed fire-arms again in the Soviet of Washington. Even if it’s something as silly as the FM-9:

    (I don’t expect to buy it, I just want to be able to do so.)

    • Freedom is recognizing your personal physical daily tolerance for firing your Carl Gustav recoilless rifle.

      • Or your Boyes Anti-tank Rifle, currently considered a “destructive Device.”

  5. If there were “good” arguments to be made for their ruling the court would have made them. They didn’t. Which should speak volumes.

Comments are closed.