Federal judge again strikes down California law banning gun magazines of more than 10 rounds

Comments

• sudo22@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Good. California regulations have done nothing to improve gun violence in their state when compared to less restrictive states like Texas. Even ignoring the blatant constitutional issues.

  Texas has 3.2 gun murders per 100k. California has 3.4/100k.

  Source, from the Murders section

  Better social safety nets would be far more effective at reducing all forms of violence.

  source

  • PizzaMan@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    California regulations have done nothing to improve gun violence in their state when compared to less restrictive states like Texas.

    That’s not true.

    www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/…/firearm.htm

    Texas has significantly more firearm deaths than California, 9p/100k vs 15p/100k

    Better social safety nets would be far more effective at reducing all forms of violence.

    We should be doing both. The lack of social stability/mobility and health services is a part of the core problem. But it is not the only part.

    source

    • Blamemeta@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Gun violence is nothing more than an arbritary metric whose sole purpose is gun control. If they wanted violence, theyd say violence. If they wanted suicides, theyd say suicides.

      But no, they had a conclusion and made up gun violence as a metric.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • sudo22@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Once again lumping in suicides without clearly stating such, to artificially bolster gun violence. This data includes suicides, which a mag disconnector, chamber indicator, registry, etc won’t help with.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • dartanjinn@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Nope. There is no and should not be a requirement to register to express a right that clearly states it shall not be infringed. Not a chance. Once again, showe a criminal with bad intentions who’s going to register his firearms he bought out of the back of a van. You can’t because they don’t exist. Registration would only make things worse for everyone. Especially a publicly searchable registry where home invaders could add that little step to planning out which homes they’re going to invade.

      Any and every requirement is a barrier to your right to bear arms and is an infringement because people like you think you sit on some high horse when in reality it’s you making life worse for everyone involved. Stop it.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
• breadsmasher@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Why would anyone need more than 10 rounds in a magazine for an assault rifle? “self defense”?

  source

  • JingJang@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Here are a few:

    1. Because it’s our right. (I know you know this but it’s still the first reason).

    2. Because when recreationally shooting a gun like this it’s more enjoyable to have larger capacities.

    3. Number 1 again.

    source

    • PizzaMan@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Because it’s our right.

      The 2nd amendment says nothing about regulation of magazines.

      Because when recreationally shooting a gun like this it’s more enjoyable to have larger capacities.

      So your personal enjoyment is more important than the lives of children?

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • Blamemeta@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Why not? No one needs an excuse.

    source

    • breadsmasher@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Yes. Arm everyone. No excuses. Give everyone rifles with large magazines. What could possibly go wrong in the only country where things regularly go wrong

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • FireTower@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Self defense is but one reason to own a rifle. I’d suggest that people are entitled to own the most apt means of self preservation. And it seems that in the era of intermediate cartridges the most pragmatic sum for a rifle to hold is usually 30 rounds beyond that magazine start to become a hindrance. In most cases people might not use even all ten rounds. Having the additional capacity doesn’t prohibit one from using fewer rounds, but having only 10 does inhibit you from using more than 10 rounds.

    Another reason for ownership of rifles is in common defense as alluded to in the 2A by the “Necessary to the security of a free State”. The standard on the global stage for an intermediate cartridge rifle is also 30 rounds of capacity. Meaning most threats to the security of our state would have three times the capacity of a 10 rd magazine.

    source
  • Polarsailor@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Here's one:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNEWXghq_4I&ab_channel=CentralFloridaHogCullers

    source

    • breadsmasher@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Californians need more than 10 rounds because of hog hunters in florida?

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • random65837@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Why do you feel people must justify “need”? Aside from the PITA at a range or sporting use which is by far the majority of when people are using them, do you “need” your gas tank to hold whatvit does? Why not hold 5gals and you can simply fill itnup all the time? What does that acomplish other than being a pain in the ass?

    Also, AR’s aren’t “assault rifles”. An M16 is, an M4 is, just like your initial argument these are things people say that (sorry), dont know what they’re talkig about.

    source

    • PizzaMan@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Why do you feel people must justify “need”?

      Because people and children are dying from firearm related deaths all the fucking time in this country. Your rights end where another’s nose begins.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • breadsmasher@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      smoothbrain take right here

      source