Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Vendome

Without the convoluted legaleze....what is the outcome, what did they decide and what is the impact?


4 posted on 07/18/2018 11:17:59 PM PDT by gunsequalfreedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: gunsequalfreedom

In California, it’s well-known that you can’t buy magazines with a capacity of more than 10 rounds. Oh, if you had a 30 round or other so-called “high capacity” magazine from before the ban, that was fine. “If you like your magazine, you can keep your magazine,” kind of thing.

However, recently, the grandfather clause that permitted that was removed, requiring people with those magazines to either remove them from the state, sell them to a licensed gun dealer (and why they would buy something they couldn’t sell is beyond me), or turn it in to law enforcement for destruction.

Unsurprisingly, the rule was challenged and a preliminary injunction was issued. This is a logical step designed to keep people from being forced to lose magazines they can’t recoup should the challengers win.

Then, in a shocking turn of events, the Ninth Circuit actually affirmed the preliminary injunction.


5 posted on 07/18/2018 11:27:12 PM PDT by Vendome (I've Gotta Be Me https://youtu.be/wH-pk2vZGw2M)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson