Judge Benitez of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California held that the California ban on high capacity magazines in California Penal Code 32310 violates the Second Amendment. California defines High Capacity Magazines as holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition.
The court referenced instances where homeowners used firearms in the home for self-defense. One homeowner ran out of ammunition due to the difficulty in accessing a spare magazine or having another firearm immediately available. Another was heavily outnumbered by multiple intruders with firearms.
The Heller Test
The following facts used in the decision are based on the Heller Test:
● Guns are used for self-defense
● Magazines are required to make many common guns operable
● Nationwide, millions of high capacity magazines are owned by law-abiding citizens for self-defense
● Magazines that are limited in capacity infringe upon a citizen's ability to use common guns for lawful purposes, such as self-defense
Ultimately, the ban fails because it criminalizes a law-abiding citizen's possession of a common magazine that is used for lawful purposes and prohibits its use for self-defense in and around the home.
Additional references in the decision are:
● All guns are inherently dangerous and protected by the Second Amendment
● Firearms cannot be categorically prohibited because they are dangerous
● The relative dangerousness of a weapon is irrelevant when the weapon belongs to a class of arms commonly used for lawful purposes.
Another important factor in the court's decision is the apparently arbitrary number of 10 rounds being safe and 11 rounds being too dangerous. What then would prevent the government from changing that number to 8? to 3? to 1?
Historically Accepted Prohibitions
The State of California has argued that high capacity magazines have been the subject of regulation since the 1930s. Using this argument, they determined that these regulations are historically accepted and beyond the reach of the Second Amendment. However, the reality is that the first ban limiting magazine capacity was passed in 1990 in New Jersey. This ban applied to magazine capacities over 15 rounds. Since detachable magazines have existed for more than a century, and government restrictions have only been more recent, the historically accepted prohibitions argument does not hold.
Failure of the Intended Purpose of the California Ban on High Capacity Magazines
California's ban on high capacity magazines was based on the belief that the unavailability of magazines holding greater than 10 rounds would reduce the number of victims in mass shootings. Yet in 14 of the 17 mass shootings over a 36 year period in California, no large capacity magazines were used. Instead, the shooters carried multiple firearms. 3 mass shootings involved single weapons. One was a revolver; one was a California legal 10-round pistol; the third was carried out by a New Mexico resident who legally purchased a 15-round pistol in New Mexico before traveling to California. California's high capacity magazine ban did nothing to prohibit these mass shooting crimes.
Ten years of a federal ban on large-capacity magazines did not stop mass shootings nationally. Twenty years of a California ban on large capacity magazines have not stopped mass shootings in California.
The Second Amendment was created to allow the citizens of the United States the opportunity to protect itself from a tyrannical government. And now the Government aims to limit the citizens' ability to protect itself.
Circumventing High Capacity Magazine Bans
Bans on high capacity magazines are easily circumvented by carrying multiple magazines and/or multiple loaded firearms. The time required to swap magazines or grab another loaded firearm is insignificant and has not been shown to reduce mass shooting casualties. In fact, the Parkland High School shooter carried 15 10-round magazines. No data that the California ban on high cap mags is effective.
The "Most Useful for Military Service" Argument
It has been argued that large capacity magazines are most useful for military applications, and thus not protected by the Second Amendment for civilian citizens. This argument fails because, at the time of the writing of the Second Amendment, both militia and civilian would have had access to a musket rifle. There was no distinction between more useful for military or civilian.
Conclusion
The Federal Court finds that magazines are defined as arms in the context of the Second Amendment. Criminalizing the purchase and/or possession of common magazines is a violation of the Second Amendment. As such, California Penal Code 32310 is declared to be unconstitutional in its entirety.
Act Now
With this decision on March 29th, 2019, California residents are allowed to purchase and possess high capacity magazines. This may change if the Attorney General seeks and receives a stay on this decision. If you are interested in large capacity magazines, you might consider going to Impact Guns, the largest online gun store and ordering magazines while you can.
