California ban on high capacity magazines declared unconstitutional

[Yonadav]

I don't need to.  Anything that goes against the original 2nd amendment idea that you only have a right to bear arms as part of a state run, funded and trained militia shows a worrying lack of ability to interpret law.

That's what I thought. You've made up your mind so why bother to look at the contrary evidence.

There are a couple of points I'd like to make here. First is it is a district judge's job to make a decision based on applicable case law. Second is right now at this point in time in the United States the latest decided by SCOTUS applicable case law says gun ownership is an individual right not a collective one, and gun owners are allowed to have guns commonly in use in the country. Right or wrong those are decisions were made by SCOTUS, and district judges don't get to contradict them. So before you question a judges "ability to interpret and rule on law" when you don't like a decision it just might be a good idea to look at the decision first.

---

Here is a new like to the decision since the original one seems to be broken now.

https://d3uwh8jpzww49g.cloudfront.net/sh...s_-msj.pdf

Thanks for posting the link. My guess is that the adamant gun control crowd will refuse to read it. I just spent a good deal of time looking it over, but haven't read it all. It's coverage of Heller would be a good education for some of these folks. For me, the reading became almost comical when the matter of the state's interest in the law was covered, because the law so utterly fails to address the state's specifically stated interest in it. I'm sure the judge was not intentionally lampooning the state. It was just impossible to honestly examine the state's interest in the law without it sort of lampooning the state.

---

Sure.  Still, I personally think that sinking political capital into magazine regulation is misguided.   It's not going to stop anything (even if we somehow managed to find all the high cap mags and got rid of them - which we won't)........ there isn't even a credible explanation as to how it could stop anything.  

I'm not a big fan of paying for nothing, as a principle.  Regardless of whether any of us think there should be, any gun regulation will cost.

Nobody should think things will magically change overnight, but we are at this point because of 40 years of fear marketing by the NRA and the industry. There was a time when nobody thought slavery would end, or segregation would end, but it did. America CAN if it wanted to, get a handle on firearm violence and still allow firearm ownership. But we cannot sit and do nothing and allow one industry and one lobby dictate the narrative. 

We have to do something other than what we are currently doing.

The NRA thanks you for mentioning the NRA.