9th Circuit says Mag Capacity Restrictions Unconstitutional

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • rascal

    Ultimate Member
    Feb 15, 2013
    1,253
    My takeaway from the article was that deal making makes predictions on the outcome that much more difficult.

    I would disagree that he seems lost on the practicalities of gun control law. He is simply pointing out some of the issues the court needs to address.

    His quote of Kagan is not absurd. It remains an issue and it is unclear how the court will deal with the issue.

    I suspect that Kagan would find the law constitutional because there is no right to concealed carry and justify that conclusion based on history.

    Given the wheeling and dealing that may occur, I would not dismiss other's view because they may impact the opinion that is ultimately written.

    I disagree. Kagan already has her mind made up. she doesn't even support Heller. it is one of several fallacies arguments used by Blackman. it is idiotic of him to include it as if it is meaningful.

    This entire case depends on concerns for court packing and the ability/interest of the five to the right of Roberts.

    And we knew how Roberts will go, since he was excoriated by his colleagues last year for signaling that not the merits, but who forced his hand, would determine his vote on the cases last year.
     

    press1280

    Ultimate Member
    Jun 11, 2010
    7,878
    WV
    My takeaway from the article was that deal making makes predictions on the outcome that much more difficult.

    I would disagree that he seems lost on the practicalities of gun control law. He is simply pointing out some of the issues the court needs to address.

    His quote of Kagan is not absurd. It remains an issue and it is unclear how the court will deal with the issue.

    I suspect that Kagan would find the law constitutional because there is no right to concealed carry and justify that conclusion based on history.

    Given the wheeling and dealing that may occur, I would not dismiss other's view because they may impact the opinion that is ultimately written.

    If that is the case, I suspect we will not see her come out and say that open carry would be the default right instead. This will simply be a Peruta tactic. Say that CCW isn't part of the right, but when open carry comes up she'll squeeze the crap out of the erroneous reading of the Statute of Northampton and claim that open carry terrorizes the King's subjects, even though Alito called out NY's blatant omission of the word "offensively".
    The problem for her is she likely only has maybe one other vote for this position as Breyer is just so anti gun he won't even go that far.
     

    wjackcooper

    Active Member
    Feb 9, 2011
    689
    Res ipsa loquitur

    As usual, in lower courts the dissents more accurately reflect Heller:

    “In reality, this tiers-of-scrutiny approach” (i. e., interest-balancing public safety v. the 2A using some level of scrutiny) “functions as nothing more than a black box used by judges to uphold favored laws and strike down disfavored ones.” Pages 104, 105.* "On en banc review, we should have scrapped this regime and adopted what the Supreme Court tells us is the proper analytical framework— one that looks to the text, history, and tradition of the Second Amendment." Page 108. *

    “Res ipsa loquitur.” ** Page 156

    Regards
    Jack

    *https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2021/11/30/19-55376.pdf

    **Latin, "the thing speaks for itself."
     
    Last edited:

    Occam

    Not Even ONE Indictment
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 24, 2018
    20,239
    Montgomery County

    Texasgrillchef

    Active Member
    Oct 29, 2021
    740
    Dallas, texas
    Keep in mind that ANJRPC v NJ is a magazine base case that is ON HOLD pending the release of NYSPRA.

    They wouldn’t leave a case on hold, since 9-2021 just to deny cert after 8-9 months of being on hold. Totally different then rescheduling a case 14+ times (Aposhian, bump stock case) There is a reason they placed ANJRPC on hold instead of simply rescheduling it 15, 16, or 17 or more times.

    ANJRPC will get a decision before Duncan v Bonta. Once NJ falls, so will Bonta, and everyone else.

    patience grasshoppers
     

    jcutonilli

    Ultimate Member
    Mar 28, 2013
    2,474
    Keep in mind that ANJRPC v NJ is a magazine base case that is ON HOLD pending the release of NYSPRA.

    They wouldn’t leave a case on hold, since 9-2021 just to deny cert after 8-9 months of being on hold. Totally different then rescheduling a case 14+ times (Aposhian, bump stock case) There is a reason they placed ANJRPC on hold instead of simply rescheduling it 15, 16, or 17 or more times.

    ANJRPC will get a decision before Duncan v Bonta. Once NJ falls, so will Bonta, and everyone else.

    patience grasshoppers

    They would and they have denied cert after placing a petition on hold for over a year. See NYSRPA (v NYC). When they granted NYSRPA (v Bruen) they limited the question presented. It is unclear what they may say that would impact ANJRPC if they stick to the question presented.

    I think this case presents a better case for review compared to ANJRPC as this case has both a lower court that found the law unconstitutional and a record with facts. The ANJRPC case is simply based on precedent.
     

    Texasgrillchef

    Active Member
    Oct 29, 2021
    740
    Dallas, texas
    They would and they have denied cert after placing a petition on hold for over a year. See NYSRPA (v NYC). When they granted NYSRPA (v Bruen) they limited the question presented. It is unclear what they may say that would impact ANJRPC if they stick to the question presented.

    I think this case presents a better case for review compared to ANJRPC as this case has both a lower court that found the law unconstitutional and a record with facts. The ANJRPC case is simply based on precedent.

    Well SCOTUS is who they are and of course they can do almost anything They like. It is true they haven’t done what seems the most logical as well.

    I just don’t see any reason for them to put a case on hold, for so long vs rescheduling etc…

    Keep in mind that the first NYSRPA case was ruled to be moot. Only because of actions that NYC took. The second NYSPRA has no issue of mootness. So any cases that they had on hold during the first NYSPRA becomes irrelevant because of what happened with it being ruled moot.

    I do agree Duncan is a much better case then ANJRPC if they are going to grant cert, and then have oral arguments. However IMHO. Neither will have oral arguments. I think ANJRPC will get a PC, and that PC will govern what happens in Duncan. Now I admit I could be totally wrong.

    Yes they did limit the question in the second NYSPRA case. However, the Justices themselves brought up several more issues during oral arguments. Some of those issues they voiced concerns with, in earlier dissents on various other 2A cases. Since those issues were highlighted in oral arguments, I do believe some form of comment and or statement Will be issued in the forthcoming opinion.

    Keep in mind as well, a lot was said in the Heller Opinion that had nothing to do with the original question presented to SCOTUS.

    I always keep in mind that everything right now is speculation until the opinion is issued.

    Although some of the speculation is probably pretty accurate, in that we will win the case to some degree, and the odds that Thomas is writing the opinion is highly likely. Especially if the vote on the main question is 5-4. Thomas has seniority, and he will keep that one for himself. Even if it is a 6-3 vote. Roberts probably won’t write it and will give it to Thomas. Roberts does owe Thomas this one.
     

    pcfixer

    Ultimate Member
    May 24, 2009
    5,948
    Marylandstan
    AND people still spout this narrative that's false.....
    "there is no right to concealed carry and justify that conclusion based on history."

    One can't detach..

    Concealed Carry | Right-to-Carry. Self-defense is a fundamental right, and the right to use firearms for self-defense is recognized by the Constitution of the United States, the constitutions of 44 states, the laws of all states, and the common law. Today, 42 states, accounting for 74 percent of the U.S. population, have Right-to-Carry (RTC) laws.
     

    Texasgrillchef

    Active Member
    Oct 29, 2021
    740
    Dallas, texas
    Since ANJRPC is “on hold” pending NYSPRA.

    I am going to predict one of the following.

    That if ANJRPC is granted for oral arguments, Duncan will be put on hold.

    OR

    ANJRPC will be given a PC, and Duncan will get the similar PC with reference towards ANJRPC.

    I doubt they will deny cert on ANJRPC just to Grant Duncan. Or they would have done so already.

    Thus whatever the final verdict especially if positive will have a direct Impact on Duncan.

    The two cases are both too similar to not have impact on each other and there is a reason they put it on hold since September 2021
     

    lazybones

    Active Member
    BANNED!!!
    Mar 25, 2022
    178
    You want poster examples of the need for standard cap mags:
    1. Rooftop Koreans (and others) in the LA riots
    2. Kenosha Kid; he ran 5 with 3 hits but he had change to spare on the mob if needed
    3. Other riots and chit over the years.

    Who the F has the right to set limits on my mag capacity for self-defense?
    The quoted post and a bunch of other comments really belong in the WC. Otherwise this thread will fill with a bunch counter examples where large magazines kill more than they save. If people can claim hi caps save lives then that makes valid entire chain of thinking about the life toll for magazines

    Ex: Classrooms full of dead elementary school kids
     

    TI-tick

    Ultimate Member
    BANNED!!!
    MDS Supporter
    The quoted post and a bunch of other comments really belong in the WC. Otherwise this thread will fill with a bunch counter examples where large magazines kill more than they save. If people can claim hi caps save lives then that makes valid entire chain of thinking about the life toll for magazines

    Ex: Classrooms full of dead elementary school kids
    It's a societal problem that won't be fixed buy any firearms regulations.

    Who is anyone to tell the other what they need to defend themselves?
     

    Texasgrillchef

    Active Member
    Oct 29, 2021
    740
    Dallas, texas
    What everyone always forgets.

    It takes a good guy with a gun to stop a bad guy with a gun.

    No matter what law you pass, a bad guy will always be able to get a gun.

    Gun free zones aren’t gun free… they are just gun free by law abiding citizens.
     

    Texasgrillchef

    Active Member
    Oct 29, 2021
    740
    Dallas, texas
    Since this case is being held due to the NYSPRA case, just like the ANJRPC case is being held due to NYSPRA, both are magazine cases.

    This is what leads me to believe something will be said in the opinion on and about the use of scrutiny in deciding cases. Either always using Strict, or using Text and History. Both of which would (IMO) would reverse the lower courts ruling and find that the magazine ban is unconstitutional.

    I do believe that when then grant, reverse, & remand, that they will issue an opinion along with the order clarifying details in how it relates to NYSPRA as that case is not about Magazine bans. Now I could be wrong. But then what point would be made for holding these two cases pending NYSPRA serve?

    Young is a carry case, and it makes sense why that one is on hold.

    Yet they also just put on hold an AWB case as well, because of NYSPRA. So that’s a positive sign as well.

    Now if they will just hurry up and release the opinion!
     

    Bob A

    όυ φροντισ
    MDS Supporter
    Patriot Picket
    Nov 11, 2009
    30,691
    The quoted post and a bunch of other comments really belong in the WC. Otherwise this thread will fill with a bunch counter examples where large magazines kill more than they save. If people can claim hi caps save lives then that makes valid entire chain of thinking about the life toll for magazines

    Ex: Classrooms full of dead elementary school kids
    WC is not free of moles and other pests.

    Hi caps do save lives in self-defense situations. Admittedly most do not require more than a half-dozen - if that - but won't you feel silly, for your final couple seconds, if it turns out you needed a few more?

    NY tried to limit capacity to 7 in the magazine; I don't think they managed it. (It's estimated that 95% of the EBRs in that state have not been registered with the State Police, as required in the so-called "SAFE" Act of 2013, which also mandated magazine limits). Gun owners in MD are much more easily intimidated.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,934
    Messages
    7,259,571
    Members
    33,350
    Latest member
    Rotorboater

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom