The three-judge panel had backed a 2017 ruling by San Diego-based U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez that declared unconstitutional a state law prohibiting the buying or selling of such magazines since 2000. This law prohibited new sales or imports, but left those who had the magazines before keeping them. There are three crimes related to illegal acts with high-capacity magazines. In 2016, California voters also passed Proposition 63, which (among many other gun safety reforms) includes ownership of high-capacity magazines starting June 1. July 2017.3 The legislator had previously allowed individuals to remain in legal possession of high-capacity magazines if they were legally acquired before the year 2000, but because most of these magazines do not have identifiers to indicate when they were manufactured or sold. Law enforcement agencies pointed out that this loophole has made broader law enforcement almost impossible in many cases, and that the illegal possession of high-capacity chargers poses a threat to public safety as a result. But assault weapons remain illegal in California as the state appeals the verdict.18 „We are disappointed with today`s verdict,” Keane said. „A law banning magazines ubiquitously elected by tens of millions of law-abiding citizens, including Californians, is an unconstitutional violation of the Second Amendment.” California Criminal Code 32310 PC is California`s law on high-capacity magazines (used with firearms).
The San Francisco-based court`s bench panel acted after two out of three judges in a smaller 9th District panel ruled last year that the state`s ban on magazines containing more than 10 bullets violated the U.S. Constitution`s protection of the right to carry firearms. Please note that certain persons and/or situations relating to high-capacity magazines are exempt from prosecution. For example, law enforcement officers can sell, transfer, or possess these ammunition holders.6 „Today`s decision is a victory for public safety in California,” Attorney General Rob Bonta, the defendant in the case, said in a statement. „Gun violence is an epidemic in this country, but laws like our ban on high-capacity magazines are reasonable ways to prevent this violence, including devastating mass shootings. While this law is fully enforceable, law enforcement agencies cannot simply search for these illegal journals without a likely reason. Violations and arrests of otherwise law-abiding residents will most likely occur if the firearm equipped with the illegal magazine is used in self-defense or if the weapon is found as a result of another encounter with the police. I suspect that many California residents are violating this new law, and some, to their surprise, could be arrested for owning the now-illegal magazine. While there are defenses, ignorance of the law is not. WASHINGTON, D.C. (KGTV) — In its second ruling in a week regarding California`s gun laws, the Supreme Court on Thursday ordered a lower court to reconsider its earlier ruling, which upholds the state`s ban on high-capacity gun magazines. Igor Volsky, the founder of Guns Down America, which supports stricter regulation of high-capacity magazines and semi-automatic weapons, said the Appeals Court`s decision was „reassuring” in the short term, but ultimately a mixed blessing.
A federal appeals court on Tuesday reinstated California`s ban on high-capacity magazines, a decision with national implications that could also lead to the reintroduction of a state ban on semi-automatic weapons. **Note that the application of Proposition 63 restrictions on the ownership of high-capacity magazines has been delayed pending a pending legal challenge by the NRA`s California subsidiary. To learn more about this case and the Giffords Law Center`s work in defending Proposition 63, visit our Duncan v. Becerra summary page.** The new Superprem Court order requires the 9th District to reconsider this decision, but using new guidelines issued by the Supreme Court in its recent decision in a New York gun case. „The new guidelines basically say they have to make sure that when they review a gun order, they have to make sure that that order complies with both the Second Amendment, the text — that means what it says — and the historical understanding,” legal analyst Wendy Patrick told ABC 10News.