DUNCAN V. BONTA GOES TO SCOTUS CONFERENCE - California Large Capacity Magazine Prohibition

[couragewolf]

this story reminds me of the Sig Sauer P320 damage control marketing campaign. Take some of this to the casual corner to discuss.

We really do want to keep threads mostly about the subject title

I appreciate the engineers perspective that threads and relevancy matter but really this is just a bunch of dudes at a sewing circle complaining about the latest sewing machine features

 

[JackRydden224]

Guys, are we getting standard capacity magazines first or GTA6 first?

 

[grandpapeepap]

Half life 3 before standard cap and gta 6.

 

[M_N04H]

Guys, are we getting standard capacity magazines first or GTA6 first?

GTA7 before GTA6

 

[NotARobotYet]

What exactly is supposed to be discussed here? honest question. Feels like an improv show and someone threw out the topic Duncan v Bonta. Are a bunch of dudes who aren’t lawyers supposed to pontificate about what they think is happening in the case without any actual legal context? Personally I’m thrilled to see guys engaging in a (mostly) civil manner loosely tied to the contentious topic at hand, but that’s just me. Not my website.

 

[grandpapeepap]

What exactly is supposed to be discussed here? honest question. Feels like an improv show and someone threw out the topic Duncan v Bonta. Are a bunch of dudes who aren’t lawyers supposed to pontificate about what they think is happening in the case without any actual legal context? Personally I’m thrilled to see guys engaging in a (mostly) civil manner loosely tied to the contentious topic at hand, but that’s just me. Not my website.

To relate it to the topic, if reloading 10 round magazines that you have 3 of is negligible for defending yourself in the home for instance, wouldnt it also be negligible for people who mean to do crime with 10 rounders and having 3 mags? IIRC this was an argument the states lawyer used in a hearing and didnt have a response when the judge asked wouldnt it be negligible for criminals too. Also they brought up how some guns come with 17 rounders standard so why are they called high capacity and there wasnt a real argument besides looping back to ruger helping create the 10 round limit cause his mini14 at the time mostly used 10rounders. Thats also assuming the criminals wouldnt just have illegal magazines.

 

[ikeo1]

What exactly is supposed to be discussed here? honest question. Feels like an improv show and someone threw out the topic Duncan v Bonta. Are a bunch of dudes who aren’t lawyers supposed to pontificate about what they think is happening in the case without any actual legal context? Personally I’m thrilled to see guys engaging in a (mostly) civil manner loosely tied to the contentious topic at hand, but that’s just me. Not my website.

Theres two factions when it comes to this.

1.) People who are looking for updates for a specific case who want to digest the information fast.. High signal
2.) Folks who discuss the issue and then go off on tangents. We're going to try something else to see if it can be improved or if I can try different tools to satisfy both user groups.

Everyone falls into one or the other.

 

[Jimi Jah]

Knock 3 times on my coffin if any of these cases get resolved.

 

[millenialshooter83]

We're going to try something else to see if it can be improved or if I can try different tools to satisfy both user groups.

Thank you for looking into a solution for this!

 

[grandpapeepap]

Knock 3 times on my coffin if any of these cases get resolved.

Pretty inclusive we have members who are vampires.

 

[Dvrjon]

What exactly is supposed to be discussed here? honest question. Feels like an improv show and someone threw out the topic Duncan v Bonta. Are a bunch of dudes who aren’t lawyers supposed to pontificate about what they think is happening in the case without any actual legal context? Personally I’m thrilled to see guys engaging in a (mostly) civil manner loosely tied to the contentious topic at hand, but that’s just me. Not my website.

Nothing. There was never an expectation to discuss anything when I initiated the “improv show” and “threw out the topic of Duncan v. Bonta.”

I posted this issue without any intent that anybody discuss anything about this litigation. The post’s information regards the status of probably the most critical California 2A case ever moved to the SCOTUS which can also have significant impact on the national stage. The purpose of the post was to inform. It did that. But, if some folks need to understand that this is not “improv”, let me clarify.

This case was initiated in 2016 after the approval of Proposition 63…Yeah, NINE (9) years.

It has been through the courts twice, having been sent to SCOTUS for cert and then remanded after Bruen. It has taken years to once again climb the ladder for cert and has now been accepted for conference review. The SCOTUS will decide if they will or will not hear the case. If they deny cert, the issue is closed and LCMs are dead in California…and in the U.S.A.

With that, the state’s premise that SCOTUS’ characterization that the 2A doesn’t cover arms that are “dangerous and unusual” actually means arms that are “unusually dangerous’. This would allow any challenge based upon the fear that something is gonna be different or enhance a firearm’s capability in any way.

It would also set in stone that magazines are accoutrements, not arms, because their capacity is not integral to the operation of the weapon. That opens the door to regulate or prohibit virtually every part of a firearm outside of the fire control system, as not protected under the 2A. That’s red dots; that’s night sights; that’s grips; that’s barrels. That’s everything that doesn’t make the gun go “bang”.

Finally, if the statute is upheld, the precedent would establish that the state can prohibit a commonly used firearm item and mandate that the owner be dispossessed of that item. Either modify it, sell it at a loss or turn it in to law enforcement for distraction without compensation.

But if folks want to discuss other stuff, that’s fine. At least the post informed you.

Conference is set for Nov 21, 2025.

Best wishes.

 

[treelogger]

I disagree on two parts of your post:

If they deny cert, the issue is closed and LCMs are dead in California…and in the U.S.A.

On the contrary. Given the current political climate, states like Texas and Florida will go out of their way to make sure LCMs are legal there, and find some way to make political hay from being on the opposite side of California and Newsom.

Will congress get into the game at some point? Doubtful. The national legislature has been so dysfunctional for the last decade or two, I can't see them doing anything for or against guns in the foreseeable future.

That opens the door to regulate or prohibit virtually every part of a firearm outside of the fire control system, as not protected under the 2A. That’s red dots; that’s night sights; that’s grips; that’s barrels. That’s everything that doesn’t make the gun go “bang”.

No, as Heller clearly shows, a means of self defense needs to remain. So it has to be possible to buy a functioning handgun, with a halfway reasonable magazine capacity (let's not argue whether that is 6 or 10, but 1 is right out), in a reasonable caliber. Just like Heller was able to get a 6-shot 22 revolver, I think the common 9mm pistol will have to remain legal. Now, you may be right that eventually things like optics may go, but for now the basic meaning of the 2A as "must be able to defend oneself at home, and while carrying in public, with a functioning gun capable of stopping a threat" is not being questioned.

Now, if Heller is overturned, and we go back to the Miller situation (roughly meaning that gun rights only applied to members of the organized militia = the military + national guard), then all bets are off. And that's not as far fetched as some may think. As an example, see how the Supreme Court was wiling to overthrow 50 years of precedent in Roe.

 

[Jcwatchdog]

I disagree on two parts of your post:

On the contrary. Given the current political climate, states like Texas and Florida will go out of their way to make sure LCMs are legal there, and find some way to make political hay from being on the opposite side of California and Newsom.

Will congress get into the game at some point? Doubtful. The national legislature has been so dysfunctional for the last decade or two, I can't see them doing anything for or against guns in the foreseeable future.


No, as Heller clearly shows, a means of self defense needs to remain. So it has to be possible to buy a functioning handgun, with a halfway reasonable magazine capacity (let's not argue whether that is 6 or 10, but 1 is right out), in a reasonable caliber. Just like Heller was able to get a 6-shot 22 revolver, I think the common 9mm pistol will have to remain legal. Now, you may be right that eventually things like optics may go, but for now the basic meaning of the 2A as "must be able to defend oneself at home, and while carrying in public, with a functioning gun capable of stopping a threat" is not being questioned.

Now, if Heller is overturned, and we go back to the Miller situation (roughly meaning that gun rights only applied to members of the organized militia = the military + national guard), then all bets are off. And that's not as far fetched as some may think. As an example, see how the Supreme Court was wiling to overthrow 50 years of precedent in Roe.

Roe v Wade was overturned because it basically picked out one random medical procedure, and bestowed on this medical procedure special constitutional protection. Do people have a constitutional right to having a wart removed also? It was a bad decision and even Ruth Bader Ginsburg said as much.

 

[Jimi Jah]

Gavin will respond by making mags over 10 rounds a felony.

Then we get another 20+ years of litigation.

That's how Excremento rolls. One law is overturned and replaced by two more. Then Excremento gets several years of use before being overturned. Rinse and repeat.

 

[bbp00]

It would also set in stone that magazines are accoutrements, not arms, because their capacity is not integral to the operation of the weapon.

This shows the hypocrisy of anti 2A CA legislature. Requiring magazine disconnect on handguns which makes handguns not able to fire without magazine, at the same time claiming magazines are not arms.

 

[Dvrjon]

I disagree on two parts of your post:

On the contrary. Given the current political climate, states like Texas and Florida will go out of their way to make sure LCMs are legal there, and find some way to make political hay from being on the opposite side of California and Newsom.

In the interim, a number of jurisdictions can ban large capacity accessories.

Will congress get into the game at some point? Doubtful. The national legislature has been so dysfunctional for the last decade or two, I can't see them doing anything for or against guns in the foreseeable future.

Agree. Nothing will happen before midterms after which nothing will continue to happen.

No, as Heller clearly shows, a means of self defense needs to remain. So it has to be possible to buy a functioning handgun, with a halfway reasonable magazine capacity (let's not argue whether that is 6 or 10, but 1 is right out), in a reasonable caliber. Just like Heller was able to get a 6-shot 22 revolver, I think the common 9mm pistol will have to remain legal. Now, you may be right that eventually things like optics may go, but for now the basic meaning of the 2A as "must be able to defend oneself at home, and while carrying in public, with a functioning gun capable of stopping a threat" is not being questioned.

Agree, but I said, “regulate or prohibit”. Single-action, six-shot revolvers served well for self-defense into the 19th Century. Semi-autos may be seen as new technology which is “unusually dangerous” rather than “dangerous and unusual”.

If anything outside of the firing chain is an accessory it can be regulated.

Trigger Pull: Triggers are essential, but Trigger Pull is discretionary. The Glock NYPD trigger was set at 8-12 lbs. NYPD only recently dropped it to 5 lbs. I’m sure the Roster testing for “Not Unsafe Hanguns” can be modified to require a trigger pull of 8-12 lbs in single action mode. Anything lighter is “unusually dangerous”.

Magazines: not an issue of single round, but the basic 1911 carries 7 rounds and is a pistol designed for military use. The FBI stats (liberally applied) say civilian gunfights are 3 rounds/3 ft/3 seconds. Define the “accessory” as <5 rounds and the “self-defense” issue is resolved above one round, above the FBI stats, and below the standard capacity of the 1911 military weapon.

Remember, in CA when the one gun purchase in 30 days was overturned? The legislature was passing a bill to prohibit more than 3 gun purchases in 30 days. That’s now in place. (I doubt that will stand scrutiny, but it’s the whack-a-mole game at work).

Now, if Heller is overturned, and we go back to the Miller situation (roughly meaning that gun rights only applied to members of the organized militia = the military + national guard), then all bets are off. And that's not as far fetched as some may think. As an example, see how the Supreme Court was wiling to overthrow 50 years of precedent in Roe.

Overturning Heller would require a seismic shift in the SCOTUS composition. That’s why I’d really like to see the older conservative members retire allowing new appointments within the next year before the Senate becomes at risk.

 

[Dvrjon]

~ Threadjack~

Roe v Wade was overturned because it basically picked out one random medical procedure, and bestowed on this medical procedure special constitutional protection. Do people have a constitutional right to having a wart removed also? It was a bad decision and even Ruth Bader Ginsburg said as much.

Ginsburg had many concerns over Roe, but foremost was that it was based on the right to privacy rather than the more fundamental constitutional right to gender equality. She believed the privacy argument was a weaker and more vulnerable legal foundation.

/Threadjack/

 

[M_N04H]

This shows the hypocrisy of anti 2A CA legislature. Requiring magazine disconnect on handguns which makes handguns not able to fire without magazine, at the same time claiming magazines are not arms.

I remember bringing this up a few months ago here and someone had an argument for it that made no sense.

 

[treelogger]

Roe v Wade was overturned because it basically picked out one random medical procedure, and bestowed on this medical procedure special constitutional protection. Do people have a constitutional right to having a wart removed also? It was a bad decision and even Ruth Bader Ginsburg said as much.

Indeed, Roe was intellectually on thin ice. Not because the argument you made though. As is Heller; remember how hard Scalia had to work to explain away the prefatory clause.

 

[treelogger]

Overturning Heller would require a seismic shift in the SCOTUS composition.

In composition, yes. In mindset, no. That's why I would like to see the partisan hacks (of both stripes) be replaced with constitutional scholars that have respect for stare decisis, the rule of law, and separation of powers. Which is all but gone from the Supreme Court, with Justice Roberts still using it for advertising when it suits him.