View Full Version : Magazine Limit Court Challenge
Hello All-
I have been a member here a long time, but rarely check things out. Given recent events, I was wondering if there is someone here who knows what the status of this case is? I saw that it was presented before an appeals judge? What gives?
Thanks in advance!
Will1776
10-07-2018, 09:48
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pydie4etn-8
Ouch. One judge refers to a magazine as "cartridges" when discussing removable base plates.
I see the points made, and perhaps the judges have grasped the fundamental flaw in the current law, but jeeze.
Bailey Guns
10-07-2018, 12:49
There should be a statement to the effect of "WARNING: Dudley Brown Video" on that link.
OldFogey
10-07-2018, 13:56
Just bought a pc carbine at my lgs (haven't been in in a long time). Had 30 round glock mags and 30 round pmags. Don't think the law means all that much unless your are ordering off of the web or going to one of the big box stores.
I don't know what Duds is going for here or if it will even help. Seems to be a peripheral challenge that can quickly be remedied by changing the law.
I am ready to donate for a challenge to the core of the mag ban problem; banning components of firearms in common use is the same as banning the firearm. Limiting the capacity from common use is arbitrary and violates 100 years of 2A precedent.
Banning features (CA, NY) of firearms in common use is the same thing.
If an American can't own a firearm in common use, and functioning at that level, there is no 2A.
If they want to keep a box drawn around dangerous and unusual, as Scalia noted in Heller, I'm not okay with it but can live with it.
I think such a challenge could get support from gun owners in multiple states although we only need one group of plaintiffs. If the NRA doesn't pick this up with Kavanaugh seated, I think they're going to have issues keeping members.
Rucker61
10-07-2018, 22:20
I don't know what Duds is going for here or if it will even help. Seems to be a peripheral challenge that can quickly be remedied by changing the law.
I am ready to donate for a challenge to the core of the mag ban problem; banning components of firearms in common use is the same as banning the firearm. Limiting the capacity from common use is arbitrary and violates 100 years of 2A precedent.
Banning features (CA, NY) of firearms in common use is the same thing.
If an American can't own a firearm in common use, and functioning at that level, there is no 2A.
If they want to keep a box drawn around dangerous and unusual, as Scalia noted in Heller, I'm not okay with it but can live with it.
According to Caetano, no firearm currently sold to US citizens outside of NFA 1934 is both dangerous and unusual.
According to Caetano, no firearm currently sold to US citizens outside of NFA 1934 is both dangerous and unusual.
Consistent with 2A and even better!!! One would even point that NFA was the previous "compromise" made that Libs refuse to recognize today.
They claim Caetano is narrow though.
I still don't know how you protect in common use if the common use components (magazines, pistol grips, shoulder things that go up) are banned. And I don't know why it is legal to ban them if they aren't defined as dangerous and unusual because, per Miller, that is the standard as specifically applied to NFA.
These bans exist on some fairly tortured logic and I don't know why 2A is incorporated against the states the way other amendments have been. We even have McDonald!
Yeah, I'm ready to donate! But not to Dud.
Rucker61
10-08-2018, 10:45
Consistent with 2A and even better!!! One would even point that NFA was the previous "compromise" made that Libs refuse to recognize today.
They claim Caetano is narrow though.
I still don't know how you protect in common use if the common use components (magazines, pistol grips, shoulder things that go up) are banned. And I don't know why it is legal to ban them if they aren't defined as dangerous and unusual because, per Miller, that is the standard as specifically applied to NFA.
These bans exist on some fairly tortured logic and I don't know why 2A is incorporated against the states the way other amendments have been. We even have McDonald!
Yeah, I'm ready to donate! But not to Dud.
Interesting reading here on the why's and how's of state/local bans:
http://arizonalawreview.org/pdf/59-3/59arizlrev773.pdf
Interesting reading here on the why's and how's of state/local bans:
http://arizonalawreview.org/pdf/59-3/59arizlrev773.pdf
Skimmed it.
https://imgur.com/YWAVm78.jpg
This is like arguing what the definition of "is" is. Was the court supposed to present a percentage test in Heller? A number? How can we even analyze that when there is no registry. Let alone any tracking of magazines sales?
Miller gave us the test!!!!!
Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment, or that its use could contribute to the common defense.
States think that's a one-way line (restriction only). Needs to be revisited.
https://imgur.com/RQDzZt5.jpg
Anyone believe this? And why is the study limited to a state? These are Federally protected civil rights.
Had I shown that only 1% of the population in Colorado is gay, after banning gays and because I alone say so, would that uphold Amendment 2?
Will1776
10-08-2018, 13:29
Why don’t people like Dudley Brown?
Zundfolge
10-08-2018, 14:32
Why don’t people like Dudley Brown?
Oh boy ... ok. So most people see Dudley as more interested in promoting Dudley than in promoting the Second Amendment ... in fact the magazine ban and universal background check nonsense we're now living under is partially his fault as there was a good, solid Republican running for the State Senate (or was it the house?) in a close race that didn't bow, scrape and kiss Dudley's ring so he withheld his support causing the Democrats to win that seat and thus giving them the advantage they needed to immediately pass the gun control. Also Dudley is more interested in attacking the NRA and SAF and any other pro-gun activists that he sees as getting between him and a dollar.
If I've missed anything I'm sure others will fill in.
Zundfolge nailed it. Dudley is far more interested in separating us from our money than he is in protecting our natural rights. He's a con artist, liar, and general, all-around fuckstain.
spqrzilla
10-08-2018, 16:12
+1 for Zund's explanation.
USMC88-93
10-08-2018, 17:36
+1 for Zund.
Zund nailed it perfectly.
Also you were not privy to the dudsters delightful insights here, yea he is a member here as well. Lets just say I can in full confidence say that very few (if any) long term members here support RMGO because of the Dudster, he goes that might change.
I made the mistake of throwing some money his way one year. That was a mistake that I never repeated.
Will1776
10-08-2018, 18:51
Zund nailed it perfectly.
Also you were not privy to the dudsters delightful insights here, yea he is a member here as well. Lets just say I can in full confidence say that very few (if any) long term members here support RMGO because of the Dudster, he goes that might change.
Thanks for the explanation Zund. I guess I won’t be renewing my membership next year. I also heard he was against a compromise that would raise the limit to 30.
Zundfolge
10-08-2018, 19:47
I also heard he was against a compromise that would raise the limit to 30.
Yes, but to be fair, as much as it pains me, I was kinda in agreement with him there because I figured if we just raised the limit we'd never get rid of the idea of a mag ban and never get rid of the Universal Background Checks (which is eve more egregious if you ask me) ... that said in retrospect the compromise would probably have been a more good thing than bad because frankly after this next election I don't think Colorado comes back to the reddish purple it used to be and will slide into the sea with CA before we see another Republican governor and if we lose the Senate we'll never get it back (and we're certainly not getting rid of the mag ban or UBCs unless the courts step in).
We can't reintroduce wolves and grizzly bears fast enough.
Will1776
10-08-2018, 22:14
Yes, but to be fair, as much as it pains me, I was kinda in agreement with him there because I figured if we just raised the limit we'd never get rid of the idea of a mag ban and never get rid of the Universal Background Checks (which is eve more egregious if you ask me) ... that said in retrospect the compromise would probably have been a more good thing than bad because frankly after this next election I don't think Colorado comes back to the reddish purple it used to be and will slide into the sea with CA before we see another Republican governor and if we lose the Senate we'll never get it back (and we're certainly not getting rid of the mag ban or UBCs unless the courts step in).
Maybe an unenforced 15 round limit is better than an enforced 30 round limit
CobaltSkink
10-09-2018, 06:23
<replying to Will's point about enforced vs unenforced>
You may not remember when all this damnfoolishness passed the summer after Sandy Hook.
Colorado politicians proposed maybe seven or ten bills re: guns.
One of the bills proposed was for strict liability: where the owner could be held responsible for any damages.
Suppose a thief steals your car with an AR in it. He gets in a firefight, like what we had here in Colorado Springs several months ago, and kills a police officer.
Congratulations! You will be charged!
This bill did not pass, but the politicians sure were anxious to pass everything they could.
My representative acknowledged my email and mentioned his concern, three months after he voted for the magazine ban.
My senator never acknowledged my email; he was one of the leaders on the bandwagon. I happily signed the petition for his recall.
---
But the magazine capacity law is still on the books.
What happens when you get in an accident, and your trunk lid won't stay shut?
A politician somewhere will get enthusiastic about enforcing it.
Won't someone please think of the children ?!?!
We can't reintroduce wolves and grizzly bears fast enough.
We have coyotes!
COYOYES!!!!
Ouch. One judge refers to a magazine as "cartridges" when discussing removable base plates.
I see the points made, and perhaps the judges have grasped the fundamental flaw in the current law, but jeeze.
But other judges have not, and in my opinion, that is the crux, a de facto gun ban. That is what I stated in my report, as the expert witness for RMGO. Yes, the law could be re-written, but Hickenlooper and his attorneys do not have the legal option of re-writing the law.
The law will remain unenforced...right up to the point when it is opportune to enforce it. The same goes for all the other silly horseshit that the Dems crammed down our throats during the 2013 legislative session. They are quite alright with flexing their muscles, but whine and cry when Republicans to the same (ie, Kavanaugh).
Grant H.
10-09-2018, 14:59
Maybe an unenforced 15 round limit is better than an enforced 30 round limit
Except for what Zund is alluding to with the upcoming election.
If things don't go the way we want here in Nov, which is VERY likely, we could have an enforced 15rd limit.
Grant H.
10-09-2018, 15:01
The law will remain unenforced...right up to the point when it is opportune to enforce it. The same goes for all the other silly horseshit that the Dems crammed down our throats during the 2013 legislative session. They are quite alright with flexing their muscles, but whine and cry when Republicans to the same (ie, Kavanaugh).
Yep.
It isn't out of the realm of reality, IMO, to see someone get crosswise of the state .gov, and get brought up on "illegal magazine" charges as either a revenge action, or simply an adder. Then they can point to "look at those evil gun people breaking the law"...
Topical to this thread so I'm not starting a new one...
https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/news/releases/ag-paxton-joins-17-state-brief-supporting-lawsuit-defend-second-amendment-rights-citizens
This doesn't address NY's mag ban but starts to chip away at the blatantly unConstitutional restrictions in NYC. The brief addresses the restrictions both as being unConstitutional and being bad policy.
Zundfolge
10-10-2018, 11:12
Except for what Zund is alluding to with the upcoming election.
If things don't go the way we want here in Nov, which is VERY likely, we could have an enforced 15rd limit.
And the other argument is that if we agree that the argument is just about the number of rounds limited, the 15rd limit turned 30 could easily be changed a 10 or 5 rd limit.
And the other argument is that if we agree that the argument is just about the number of rounds limited, the 15rd limit turned 30 could easily be changed a 10 or 5 rd limit.
Which wouldn't have limited our legal options one bit when they inevitably broke their word.
30 would have put the ban outside of common use as 30 rounders are common use for the AR/AK platforms giving us less standing. Would have been harder to challenge that. If the debate was between 30 and unlimited it was foolish to let 15 win.
I think the answer is going to come out of CA or NY and should apply to all states. NYSafe was already ruled an arbitrary ban at 7 rounds. It's 10 now but no less arbitrary, just what some judge thought was reasonable. No modern pistol/rifle, as issued, has such a limit that I know of (maybe .50BMG and shotguns).
Will1776
10-10-2018, 12:19
The law will remain unenforced...right up to the point when it is opportune to enforce it. The same goes for all the other silly horseshit that the Dems crammed down our throats during the 2013 legislative session. They are quite alright with flexing their muscles, but whine and cry when Republicans to the same (ie, Kavanaugh).
How would they even enforce it?
How would they even enforce it?
How do they enforce drug laws?
Just like that.
Martinjmpr
10-10-2018, 16:04
How would they even enforce it?
I would imagine they would enforce it any time they arrest someone who is in possession of a >15 rd mag, either by getting them to confess that they obtained the mag after 7/1/13 or by asserting that they obtained the mag after 7/1/13 and then putting the defendant in a position of essentially having to prove his innocence (and yes, I know the law explicitly says that the burden of proof is on the prosecution but that doesn't prevent a zealous prosecutor from going ahead and charging the offense anyway.)
They could also enforce by 'sting' operations, i.e, try to get people to buy or obtain >15rd mags through online sales, gun shows, etc.
Hell, there are gun shops right now that sell >15 rd mags in disassembled form as "repair kits" or sell them with the stipulation that they must be taken out of state or used for LE or military use only (as if military people buy their mags at a LGS.)* So they could start by cracking down on them.
In fact, that would make a great headline, wouldn't it? I can see the Local News scare headline now: "LOCAL SHOP SELLS ILLEGAL CLIPS AND COPS DO NOTHING TO STOP IT!" Great opportunity for some enterprising DA to get his name in the paper by busting these flagrant violators of state law. :rolleyes:
*(And before someone asks, no, I'm not going to tell you which gun shops do this.)
Will1776
10-10-2018, 16:26
I would imagine they would enforce it any time they arrest someone who is in possession of a >15 rd mag, either by getting them to confess that they obtained the mag after 7/1/13 or by asserting that they obtained the mag after 7/1/13 and then putting the defendant in a position of essentially having to prove his innocence (and yes, I know the law explicitly says that the burden of proof is on the prosecution but that doesn't prevent a zealous prosecutor from going ahead and charging the offense anyway.)
They could also enforce by 'sting' operations, i.e, try to get people to buy or obtain >15rd mags through online sales, gun shows, etc.
Hell, there are gun shops right now that sell >15 rd mags in disassembled form as "repair kits" or sell them with the stipulation that they must be taken out of state or used for LE or military use only (as if military people buy their mags at a LGS.)* So they could start by cracking down on them.
In fact, that would make a great headline, wouldn't it? I can see the Local News scare headline now: "LOCAL SHOP SELLS ILLEGAL CLIPS AND COPS DO NOTHING TO STOP IT!" Great opportunity for some enterprising DA to get his name in the paper by busting these flagrant violators of state law. :rolleyes:
*(And before someone asks, no, I'm not going to tell you which gun shops do this.)
Hell some gun shops don't even take them apart. I also won't say names, but I respect them for fighting the good fight.
Too bad Burt Reynolds died. We could send him to Texakana to bring back a semi loaded with 30 round mags for the thirsty AR/AKs here in Colorado.
Does anyone remember when Coors started Pasteurization so they could ship past the Mississippi?
Great-Kazoo
10-11-2018, 07:38
Too bad Burt Reynolds died. We could send him to Texakana to bring back a semi loaded with 30 round mags for the thirsty AR/AKs here in Colorado.
Does anyone remember when Coors started Pasteurization so they could ship past the Mississippi?
Breaker, Breaker good buddy.
BPTactical
10-11-2018, 08:25
Moot point not even worth discussing IMHO, as long as we have a Democrat for a Governor and the ilk of the Demos we have had in the State legislature the Mag ban aint going anywhere.
If Polis gets in (very likely IMO) magazines are likely to be the least of our worries.
He has openly stated he feels CA and NY type firearms regulations are ideal to model CO's firearm regulations after.
ChickNorris
10-11-2018, 10:10
If comrade Polis says it, it must be true.
MileHighShooting
10-11-2018, 13:35
Question is: If Polis gets in, will Colorado go bankrupt before or after the AW Bill?
Question is: If Polis gets in, will Colorado go bankrupt before or after the AW Bill?
LOL Yes.
The Feds (er the taxpayers who aren't bailing out CA) will bail us out.
LOL Yes.
The Feds (er the taxpayers who aren't bailing out CA) will bail us out.
If the damn breaks on (direct) state bailouts, the country will be economically finished.
Trump's tax cuts were genius in limiting the SODA deductions as to end some of the indirect bailouts. Also makes people realize how they vote locally will hit their bottom line. Colorado is right on the edge of being impacted, Polis would certainly try to change that!
eddiememphis
10-19-2018, 17:10
Appeals Court Upheld the Law
https://durangoherald.com/articles/246552-colorado-court-of-appeals-upholds-states-ban-on-largecapacity-magazines
Zundfolge
10-19-2018, 17:31
Appeals Court Upheld the Law
https://durangoherald.com/articles/246552-colorado-court-of-appeals-upholds-states-ban-on-largecapacity-magazines
Off to SCOTUS.
Not tired yet :)
Not eligible for SCOTUS, only CO Supreme Court.
Think about that when you vote in a few weeks.
I read somewhere just a few minutes ago that the court upheald the magazine ban? No link to ruling so don't know if this was a current news story or a repost of something that happened previously?
kidicarus13
10-19-2018, 23:16
...in a unanimous opinion
FromMyColdDeadHand
10-19-2018, 23:32
For some reason YouTube pulled the SCOTUS argument for Heller (I don't think it was McDonald) and I listened to the 90+ minute arguments. It was pretty interesting.
-It is pretty clear that the other side thinks that guns are dangerous and should be very limited it existence and use. There are some pretty good lines in there about trigger locks and self defense.
-They look at it that no good comes from owning guns- or that the bad far out weighs the good.
-They totally don't get 'common use' and it as an individual right.
It really was kind of illustrative to hear a high-level, low BS discussion of the 2A. I really suggest listening to it.
...in a unanimous opinion
George Patton once said "If everyone is thinking alike. Then someone isn't thinking at all." A unanimous vote makes me think Patton was onto something.
The ruling this past week came from the Colorado Court of Appeals, here is the list of judges that serve there:
https://www.courts.state.co.us/Courts/Court_Of_Appeals/Judges.cfm
What I can’t find is a list of the judges that were part of last weeks magazine ban ruling. Based on the info from the page linked above it would have been a 3 judge panel.
So...any updates on this? Has the California decision changed our case?
So...any updates on this? Has the California decision changed our case?
No.
But depending what the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals does may make things interesting in Oregon and Washington, though!
I like how this judge did his best to slam the door on all the wiggle room the 9th usually uses.
O2
Bailey Guns
04-04-2019, 18:41
Look at the latest in the "Federal Judge" thread. The decision has been stayed.
Will1776
04-04-2019, 19:09
What's going on with our ban in the courts?
Good quick read on CO's mag ban in Bearing Arms. Thought I'd put it here instead of starting a new thread.
Colorado’s Magazine Ban Is The Latest Gun Control Failure
https://bearingarms.com/cam-e/2019/07/18/colorados-magazine-ban-latest-gun-control-failure/
Libs --> [Ignore] "This just proves that we haven't done enough."
bobbyfairbanks
07-19-2019, 07:54
Libs --> [Ignore] "This just proves that we haven't done enough."
Spot on GMAN. That is the really scary part.
Libs --> [Ignore] "This just proves that we haven't done enough."
Yep. Obviously more needs to be done to keep firearms out of the hands of law abiding citizens before crime will be reduced.
Yep. Obviously more needs to be done to keep firearms out of the hands of law abiding citizens before crime will be reduced.
Hey, do whatever you'd like to with your own body.
Just don't try to defend it or your family.
The secret is to identify as Magazine-Queer, and declare your sexual preference to be fuckin' high capacity magazines, baby.
The secret is to identify as Magazine-Queer, and declare your sexual preference to be fuckin' high capacity magazines, baby.
I need drum mags because I’m a size queen
I need drum mags because I’m a size queen
*folds arms*
She said give me a 47mm and make it hurt! So I reloaded ten times, then threw the co2 cartridge at her.
.
.
.
.
.
Is that a cricket? Damn.
https://www.ftfindustries.com/product/RP-26-22SCM.html
This could sum up her experience..
Hey, do whatever you'd like to with your own body.
Just don't try to defend it or your family.
Just think of all those aborted babies that will never be assaulted with a firearm using a full-capacity magazine. Job well done.
JohnnyDrama
07-20-2019, 21:48
*folds arms*
She said give me a 47mm and make it hurt! So I reloaded ten times, then threw the co2 cartridge at her.
.
.
.
.
.
Is that a cricket? Damn.
https://www.ftfindustries.com/product/RP-26-22SCM.html
This could sum up her experience..
That ain't right....
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.