A law that banned possession of large-capacity magazines for firearms in California was reinstated by the 9th Circuit on Tuesday after a lower court struck it down.
Lateif Dickerson re-fills bullets at his gun instruction headquarters. Dickerson believes in the Second Amendment and the right to own firearms. The Senate is being pushed to pass gun legislation by the Biden administration in the wake of recent mass shootings. A shortage of bullets has arisen because of a rise in sales at area gun businesses. The photo was taken by Spencer Platt.
The images are from the same company.
The court ruled that the ban complies with the group's Second Amendment rights.
The Fifth Amendment rights of the people who sued were not violated, as the owners of the magazines would be given alternatives to relinquishing the magazines, stated Judge Susan Graber.
Large-capacity magazines are those that can hold more than 10 rounds of bullets.
The law provides exceptions for active or retired law enforcement officers, as well as security guards for armored vehicles, and holders of special weapons permits.
The opinion noted that all gun massacres with 20 or more deaths in the US in the past half century involved high-capacity magazines.
The group's lawsuit was supported by the National Rifle Association.
Continue watching after the ad Visit the Advertiser website.
In response to a rise in mass shootings in California and across the country, the ban was initially set in place. California had the eighth-fewest deaths per 100,000 residents of any state due to firearms. The ban was thrown out by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, which ruled that the ban was unconstitutional and that the right to armed self-defense was the core of the Second Amendment.
Judge Andrew Hurwitz agreed with Judge Graber that there should be no dispute about the seriousness of the problem that California seeks to address. Even though there are occasional mass shootings, hardly anyone is untouched by their destruction.
Judge Patrick Bumatay dissented from the opinion, arguing that if California's law applied nationwide, it would require confiscating half of all existing firearms magazines.
