Ninth Circuit Upholds California Ammo Magazine Ban

The old "Ninth Circus" is up to their old tricks.

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld the California ban on high capacity gun magazines is not unconstitutional and does not count as an "arm" under the Second Amendment.  

According to The Reload:

The court split 7-4, with the majority holding that the types of magazines covered under the ban do not count as “arms” under the Second Amendment.

“Large-capacity magazines are optional accessories to firearms, and firearms operate as intended without a large-capacity magazine,” Judge Susan Graber wrote in Duncan v. Bonta. “A large-capacity magazine is thus an accessory or accoutrement, not an ‘Arm’ in itself. Possession of a large-capacity magazine therefore falls outside the text of the Second Amendment.”

The ruling is a setback for gun-rights activists. It establishes a binding precedent in the country’s largest appellate circuit—which contains multiple states with similar bans—blessing magazine restrictions under the Second Amendment. That precedent will stand permanently unless the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) intervenes. Whether it will choose to remains an open question.

To read more, go here. 

AZ Judge Tosses Lost or Stolen Guns Reporting Ordinance

Above, Pima County, Arizona.

An Arizona state judge tossed a criminal penalty ordinance by Pima County that fined people $1,000 for failing to report a lost or stolen gun within 48 hours. 

The ruling struck a blow against counties who violated pre-emption laws by the state. 

The Reload reported:

A state judge has ruled Pima County, Arizona, can’t fine residents $1,000 for failing to report lost or stolen guns within 48 hours.

On Tuesday, Arizona Superior Court Judge Greg Sakall ordered a permanent injunction against the county’s ordinance. He sided with gun-rights plaintiffs who argued the measure violated a state law designed to prevent localities from implementing their own gun restrictions. He even allowed plaintiffs to seek lawyer fees from the county.

“[T]he final judgment shall include a permanent injunction against the implementation or enforcement of Pima County Ordinance 2024-2,” Judge Sakall wrote in ACDL v. Pima County.

The ruling is a win for gun-rights activists who’ve sought to enforce pre-emption laws across the country. Consequently, it’s a setback for gun-control advocates who’ve looked to push the boundaries of those same laws. It may discourage other localities in states with similar laws from implementing similar lost and stolen reporting laws.

To read more, go here. 

Federal Judge Blocks Maine’s Gun Waiting Period

Last May, the seven-day waiting period for gun sales in New Mexico went into effect. A lawsuit was filed against this new law, but was unsuccessful. Where is goes from here is up in the air. I haven't seen any appeals filed on it as yet. 

In anticipation of the new law, I bought a Winchester Model 12 shotgun a month before.

However, gun rights activists were pleased in the state of Maine when a 72-hour waiting period was blocked by a federal judge saying it violated the Second Amendment.

According to The Reload:

Requiring blanket delays on firearm sales violates the Second Amendment.

That’s according to US District Court Judge Lance Walker. On Thursday, Walker issued a preliminary injunction against Maine’s 72-hour waiting period requirement for gun sales in a challenge brought by several Maine gun stores and individual gun owners. He found that the mandatory waiting period lacked a valid historical analogue and must be blocked.

“Viewed dispassionately, the Act employs no standard at all to justify disarming individuals, let alone a standard that can be described as narrow, objective, or definite,” Walker wrote in Beckwith v. Frey. “Consequently, I find that Plaintiffs have demonstrated that they are likely to succeed on the merits of their Second Amendment claim.”

The ruling immediately prevents state officials from enforcing the three-day waiting period for gun sales while the lawsuit continues to play out. It delivers a victory for gun-rights advocates challenging waiting periods after a string of recent setbacks in cases dealing with similar delays and other commercial firearms regulations. 

This will likely be appealed. 

To read more, go here. 

Americans Want Leaders and Judges Who Strictly Follow The Second Amendment

Above, the firearms department of the Albuquerque Cabela's. Photo by Armand Vaquer.

It is often said that the political party who best reflects the views of the voters will win.

That is especially true when it comes to the Second Amendment. President Trump's campaign pollster has found that Americans want leaders and judges who strictly follow the Second Amendment.

The Reload reported:

The company that ran President-elect Donald Trump’s polling operation has released a new poll showing widespread support for judges and politicians to prioritize gun rights.

The poll, conducted by McLaughlin and Associates and sponsored by the Second Amendment Foundation, was released on Tuesday. It found 77 percent of voters agree it’s “important” that federal judge appointments make it “a priority to try their best to strictly follow the 2nd Amendment.” Another 76 percent said it’s “important” for national political leaders to “protect and defend the 2nd Amendment Rights.” Fewer than 20 percent of respondents said neither was important to them.

“Americans continue to cherish their Second Amendment Rights as the results of our recent national survey clearly show,” Jim McLaughlin, CEO of the polling firm, said in a statement.

Additionally, the poll found 63 precent expect Trump to prioritize protecting their gun rights and 59 percent believe Republicans will do a better job protecting those rights than Democrats.

To read more, go here. 

Harris Walks Back On Calls For AR-15 Confiscation

Above, target-shooting with an AR-15 at the gun range. Photo by Armand Vaquer,

When politicians change their stands on issues to be more appealing to voters, one must take these with a grain of salt.

This is flip-flopping.

They may say they changed on some issues, but what's to stop them from changing their stances again once they get elected? In other words, don't trust them! They may say one thing one day and then change it to another the next.

According to The Reload:

The Democratic candidate for President no longer wants to force millions of Americans to sell their AR-15s and similar firearms to the government.

At least, that’s the line her campaign is taking. Unnamed officials with the Kamala Harris campaign told the New York Times on Monday that the Vice President no longer supports many of the progressive policy stances she took during her first presidential run in 2019, including a mandatory buyback of civilian-owned “assault weapons.” Instead, her campaign said that she merely supports banning the sale of those guns moving forward.

The Harris Campaign confirmed the position change in an email to The Reload.

“Correct, the VP will not push for a mandatory buy back as president,” Lauren Hitt, a Harris spokesperson, told The Reload. “She has expressed support for red flag laws, universal background checks and an assault weapons ban.”

The about-face on gun confiscation and retreat to the more politically palatable, though still controversial, stance of an assault weapon sales ban signals the Harris Campaign will more or less track with President Joe Biden on gun policy. It comes amidst a broader shift by the Harris team to pivot back towards more moderate political stances with an eye toward a general election contest against former President Donald Trump this November. In addition to walking back her call for gun confiscation, the Harris campaign also told the Times that she no longer supports banning fracking, eliminating private health insurance to shift toward a single-payer system, or abolishing immigration enforcement.

To read more, go here. 

NRA Super-PAC To Spend $1.1 Million On Senate Races

This election is pivotal to the future of this country. It will determine if we go on the road to socialism or the road to freedom.

The National Rifle Association's political action committee plans to spend $1.1 million on battleground senate races in several states.

From The Reload:

The nation’s largest gun-rights group is stepping up its campaign ad spending less than two weeks before the midterm elections.

The NRA’s Super PAC is planning over $1.1 million in digital ad spending across multiple battleground states in the coming days, according to its latest Federal Election Commission (FEC) filings. The ads, set to release on Thursday, are slated to run in support of the Republican Senate candidates in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Nevada, North Carolina, Georgia, and Arizona.

To read more, go here. 

Canadians Not Complying With New Gun Law

Well, bless their hearts!

The new Canadian gun laws that call for the confiscations of guns is failing. Canadians aren't complying!

From Townhall:

Well, good on ya, Canada. It seems the motto ‘come and take it’ isn’t unique to just Americans. Our neighbors to the north have a new gun law. It’s something that anti-gun liberals want here nationwide. All Canadians that owned firearms that have been included in the nation’s latest ban on so-called assault weapons must turn them over to authorities. The only problem is that they’re not doing it

(via The Reload):

Few gun owners are turning in weapons recently been made illegal by the Canadian government.

That’s according to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP). They said Canadians had only turned in 160 of the recently-outlawed firearms for destruction since the announcement of the ban.

“The Canadian Firearms Program (CFP) can confirm that, as of December 9, 2021, 18 firearms (formerly classified as restricted) affected by the May 1, 2020 Order in Council (OIC) have been deactivated,” Sgt. Caroline Duval, an RCMP spokesperson, told iPolitics on Friday. “In addition, there have been 142 OIC-affected firearms recorded as surrendered to a public agency for destruction since May 1, 2020.”

To read more, go here.