this post was submitted on 24 Sep 2023
523 points (97.1% liked)

News

29097 readers
5019 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

California cannot ban gun owners from having detachable magazines that hold more than 10 rounds, a federal judge ruled Friday.

The decision from U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez won’t take effect immediately. California Attorney General Rob Bonta, a Democrat, has already filed a notice to appeal the ruling. The ban is likely to remain in effect while the case is still pending.

This is the second time Benitez has struck down California’s law banning certain types of magazines. The first time he struck it down — way back in 2017 — an appeals court ended up reversing his decision.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago (6 children)

Even if this ban stays, it will only effect law abiding citizens.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 years ago (6 children)

Makes it so less magazines are put on the black market. Just like a total gun ban would dry up the black market. In US and Mexico.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Nobody gives a fuck what criminals and terrorists could hypothetically use, they care about what they are using, which in nearly 80% of mass shootings is a legal firearm.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 years ago (1 children)

"Mass shooting" refers to any shooting where 3 or more people are injured, and it usually happens in areas with high unemployment. Kinda sounds like a class issue to me.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Cool well fix the class issue and then you can have your guns back.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

You have it backwards - fix the class issues and you'll have nothing to bitch about regarding firearms.

That is, unless you just hate firearms.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Nah. You think it's the problem, you can prove it's the solution.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I believe we're still waiting for you to show guns are somehow the problem.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Yep, we know. It's the climate change denier strategy. However much evidence there is, demand even more before you'll consider acting.

But who gives a shit if you're ever convinced? We can just build something without your rubber stamp of approval and you can join the ranks of people who opposed things like food safety and DUI laws.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

Yep, we know. It’s the climate change denier strategy. However much evidence there is, demand even more before you’ll consider acting.

Arguably, we're still waiting for any evidence at all supporting the notion it's the firearms that are the root of the violence problem rather than merely the implement used.

The analog here would be that you seem to only care climate change can be caused by residential cars to the complete neglect of the fossil fuel contributions of the energy industry.

But who gives a shit if you’re ever convinced? We can just build something without your rubber stamp of approval and you can join the ranks of people who opposed things like food safety and DUI laws.

Feel free to find any support for the notion that I - or others here - have opposed such things.

Take all the time you need.

When you've accepted failure, consider adopting positions which may actually address root issues here rather than continuing to clutch your pearls most tightly about those darned firearms.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (8 children)

It’s relevant to the question of what would happen in the event of a gun ban.

At this stage, anyone with sufficient desire to do so can manufacture an effective and reliable firearm using readily available tools at home, using no purpose built firearm components. Magazines are dead simple in comparison.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 years ago (6 children)

How'd that work out for the drug bans? Cause man I could buy so much weed in college (in an illegal state), and trust me I literally never asked.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago (4 children)

And where do the criminals get their guns from?

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 years ago
[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Straw purchases are the main way, like 85% or more...so illegally...

[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Damn, sounds like gun laws don't work then. Better change them to increase background checks and waiting periods.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 years ago (6 children)

Yeah and what are you wanting to regulate 3d printers and 80% lowers while your at it? gonna regulate sheet metal to prevent people from making guns?

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

3d printers and illegal markets

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Every gun on the illegal markets was once a legal gun.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Work cited: crack pipe. You cant legally buy a glock switch, and there are plenty of exanples of glocks with switches on them (which usually come from china), and seeing as the ATF considers the switch themselves to be a machine gun, these are guns that were never legal, and yet theres an ungodly number of them on the streets

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago

Abolish the ATF.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago

We're not talking about guns, we're talking about mags. Which are trivial to make.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

not only this, but lets be honest here, it does absolutely nothing to reduce the lethality of firearms. Even if an active shooter abides it; most people who've spent a modicum of time practicing can drop and replace a magazine inside of a second or two.

Also, as Upgrayedd noted... you can drive a couple hours to arizona to get them. Or, just make your own mags. it's not hard.

I'm all for effective gun control laws... but this ain't it.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

And that's why you're against all abortion bans right?

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I am against all abortion bans but I don't see what one has to do with the other.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago (2 children)

It was an attempted dunk based on the assumptive chain that you defended a stricken-down firearms restriction therefore are clearly conservative, therefore clearly push abortion bans.

It's if it's impossible to them that anyone outside the NRA can like firearms.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago

The NRA has been a trvesty for the firearms community. Also fuck em and fuck Reagan for banning open carry cause of the black panthers. Bunch of fucking cowardly welps.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I see, thanks for making that connection for me. To be clear, I'm not playing for either side. I'm just a realist. Not every issue or opinion has to be red or blue.

My point is that anyone can make a magazine or buy one from somebody who can. So a ban would be useless. The only people it would effect would be those who choose to obey.

For what it's worth, I think if everyone on the radical right were launched into the sun, the world would be a better place.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago

I see, thanks for making that connection for me. To be clear, I’m not playing for either side. I’m just a realist. Not every issue or opinion has to be red or blue.

No worries at all, and agreed. It's part of why this is so incredibly frustrating - the sheer entrenched nature of this partisan-aligned wedge issue precludes any form of meaningful progress.

My point is that anyone can make a magazine or buy one from somebody who can. So a ban would be useless. The only people it would effect would be those who choose to obey.

Correct, and entirely agreed. This is the nature of the flaw with most such restrictions - unless there's compelling evidence the tools used for a given crime were sourced by legal owners, further restricting legal owners does absolutely no good.

For what it’s worth, I think if everyone on the radical right were launched into the sun, the world would be a better place.

I would wholly-support a MAGA-ectomy.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Everyone can sexually abuse minors and minors continue to be sexually abused. Does the pro-gun community advocate legalising sexually abusing children?

After all, it only effects those who choose to obey it.

For what it's worth, I think if everyone on the radical right were launched into the sun, the world would be a better place.

Gotta make sure the gun owners know who your murder fantasies are about. Meanwhile, back in reality, everywhere far-right is an absolute shithole and everywhere progressive absolutely smashes them as far as healthcare and happiness goes.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Everyone can sexually abuse minors and minors continue to be sexually abused. Does the pro-gun community advocate legalising sexually abusing children?

After all, it only effects those who choose to obey it.

Could you help me understand how sexual abuse of minors is somehow related to firearms? I have serious concerns regarding the state of your mental health if you actually entertain the notion that people should be able to sexually abuse minors.

Gotta make sure the gun owners know who your murder fantasies are about. Meanwhile, back in reality, everywhere far-right is an absolute shithole and everywhere progressive absolutely smashes them as far as healthcare and happiness goes.

Does such a reality intersect at all with your hyperbole?

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)