Texas Law Shield believes the Second Amendment protects the right of gun owners to possess magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition in Texas, Florida — even California!
Magazine bans aren’t yet a problem in many states, but bans are busily being erected in The Golden State. For example, the City of Sunnyvale’s 2013 law banned the possession of reduced-capacity (>20) or standard-capacity (>30) magazines in widespread use, limiting magazine capacity to no more than 10 rounds.
The ban is being challenged in Fyock v. City of Sunnyvale.
Gun owners who brought the suit asked Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy to block implementation of the magazine ban while litigation was ongoing, but he declined to do so on March 12. Both a district court and the 9th Circuit also refused to block the law from going into effect
In our view, the courts’ rulings put magazine owners in jeopardy. Here’s why, from the “Emergency Application For Injunction Pending Appeal” sent to Kennedy:
Applicants must thus choose between two courses of action: (1) permanently surrender their magazines or otherwise remove them from the City, foregoing the exercise of their fundamental, Second Amendment rights for the entire duration of this litigation or longer—with potentially deadly consequences in a self-defense emergency; or (2) retain possession of their magazines, exposing themselves to criminal penalties every second they flout the law. Without a grandfather clause, the retroactive criminal law is an extreme outlier, requiring that lawfully acquired and constitutionally protected property be relinquished to the government in totalitarian fashion.
A federal judge in San Jose who refused to halt the magazine measure said the impact on Second Amendment rights was “relatively light.” Do you agree?