Gun-rights groups looking to get Washington, D.C.’s restriction on firearm magazines that hold more than 10 rounds declared unconstitutional have run into a brick wall at the U.S. Appeals Court for the D.C. Circuit.
Despite arguments to the contrary, on Tuesday, the court ruled that such magazines do, indeed, pass the Bruen standard and that the ban could stand. Plaintiffs in the case Hansen v. D.C. contend that the ban didn’t meet either of the two standards set down by the U.S. Supreme Court in that pivotal case, particularly the “historical precedent” requirement.
However, using the term ELCMs (extra-large capacity magazines) throughout its ruling, the court agreed with an earlier decision by a district court that historical restrictions on particularly dangerous weapons and weapons capable of unprecedented lethality constitute a relevantly similar tradition.
“Those laws are commensurate with the District’s justification of its magazine cap to counter the growing use of [ELCMs] to facilitate crime and, specifically, to perpetrate mass shootings,” the ruling stated.
The ruling was divided, with Judge Justin R. Walker dissenting. In his lengthy dissenting opinion, Judge Walker argued that since such magazines are in common use, banning them violates the Second Amendment.
“There is no history and tradition of banning arms in common use for lawful purposes,” he wrote.
After a thorough discussion of several important Supreme Court cases, including the ruling in Heller v. D.C., Judge Walker wrote that there is no doubt that the majority of the D.C. Circuit got the ruling wrong.
“D.C.’s ban on commonly used plus-ten magazines conflicts with Heller’s holding that the government cannot ban an arm in common use for lawful purposes,” he wrote. “That alone decides this case.
“In addition, D.C. has failed to show that its ban is consistent with the nation’s historical tradition — even assuming Heller left it an open question. That too is a sufficient reason to hold that D.C.’s ban is unconstitutional.”
Pro-gun groups and individual plaintiffs have met with little satisfaction in the courts lately concerning the matter of normal-capacity magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition. In July, a New Jersey District Court ruled that the state’s ban on so-called “assault weapons” was unconstitutional but left New Jersey’s magazine ban in place.
Last year, the 7th Circuit Court ruled that Illinois’ magazine ban could stand. One case challenging such bans recently made it to the U.S. Supreme Court, but the court chose not to consider the constitutionality of the law.
The Biden-Harris administration has been seeking a ban on magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds for the past few years, so far with no progress on the matter. According to the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), such magazines make up about three-quarters of the firearms magazines owned by U.S. gun owners.
Henry rifle.
Gun Control the History Confirmed Agenda Rooted in Racism and Genocide WINS AGAIN! Until zipped lipped gun talking blowbags cease kissing the behinds of their bigoted pals and take the Second Amendment off the hotseat and glue Gun Control and its Historical Rot to the hotseat obviously Gun Control will continue to prevail.
There is this very real thing called the Gun Control Card which Gun Control zealots are fully aware of and get great relief and satisfaction seeing dumbfuk Gun talking blowbags not playing it. You know who you are.
Gun Control: the History confirmed agenda rooted in
Racism and genocideRuling Class superiority complex WINS AGAIN! Untilzipped lippedone-trick pony gun talking blowbags like Debbie W. ceasekissing thetalking out of her behind …It always amazes me how Debbie W. never makes the connection that civilian disarmament of 160 years ago and civilian disarmament of recent times have a single common denominator: the Ruling Class disarming disfavored groups. That is what we must declare to the masses.
uncommon,
Good luck with that, bro – Dimwit Debbie is thick as a brick. She cannot process the REALITY that weapons bans exist throughout history, and were ALWAYS a tool of those in power, to protect their positions from those without power. Yes, it was deployed against racial minorities . . . and against EVERY freedom movement in history, including the American Revolution. Debbie’s brain is apparently too small to recognize that the small piece she can see is just that – a small piece. Weapon control by authorities is ALWAYS about preservation of power, and has been deployed on a class basis since before Moses was in first grade.
She’s passionate, but stupid.
Lamp, are you a Jethro Tull fan?
Seriously Debbie, it’s the same shit, over and over again. WE GET IT! Stop being a spastic, and start contributing to the conversation, or shut it.
that limit is way too low considering what
s already out there…how will they enforce it?
Another example of the consequences of allowing a court to decide what your rights are and how you ‘May’ exercise them. Tyranny allowed is tyranny deserved.
Uh-huh. And your suggested specific plan for disallowing tyranny is?
Asking for a friend…
XZX, read Unintended Consequences by John Ross. It’s entertaining and will illustrates one answer to your question. That is, if you can find a copy. Be prepared, it will be expensive if you do.
A fun read but a bit outdated in how things could play out. Still a lot of useful bits of hypotheticals especially in the what unexpected mischief could a motivated but effectively unknown individual get up to.
Safe, you are correct. One of the things I enjoyed most was that the author was correct on everything from firearms to cars to aircraft. The segway into the Spearman was great.
Look to Ecuador and how they deal with corrupt judges and politicians.
so, heightened penalties for extended mags and auto switches, right?
right?
LOL
LMAO even.
Yeah only if it doesn’t work against the various narratives depending on state.
All of the D.C. thugs standing in queue turning in their “high caps & switches”,,, when hell freezes over. These alpha hotels (Dems all) just can’t help themselves.
“historical restrictions on particularly dangerous weapons and weapons capable of unprecedented lethality”
Did the fudges give some indication of what these historically restricted weapons of unprecedented lethality are, who restricted them, and when and how they were restricted?
Funny enough as much as I hear those lines nothing really comes to mind. Well weekend project for free time.
U.S. Appeals Court for the D.C. Circuit – duh
3x “judges” by Crooked Joe, 4x by the Kenya, and 1 by old man Bush (EIGHTY yr old chick/on the court since 1990!). 3x by Trump
Well now to see how the other circuits that have been sitting on various AWB, mag restrictions, and other related nonsense rule and how many changes of supreme court judges there are before anything is heard.
this will eventually end up before SCOTUS.
… but it will be held up in the circuit courts until such time as the Supreme Court is made up of a “more favorable make-up” – the libs are willing to hold their hand and play the long game
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Girardoni_air_rifle
This was invented in 1779 and held 20 rounds. There is no law I’m aware of that banned it.
Maybe we should try again?
DC denizens are lucky they can even own guns. praxtixe reloads and carry two guns.
Gargantua,
I personally advocate for the New York reload strategy. And if you are limited to 10 rounds in your magazine, you might as well carry .45 caliber handguns which produce the largest possible wound channels.
For the uninitiated, the term “New York reload” refers to carrying two handguns so that you can transition from your first handgun (after you shoot all of its cartridges) to your second handgun and immediately keep shooting–without the time delay of trying to reload your first handgun.
.50gi would like a word but yeah for us in the capacity challenged states bigger/more powerful/whatever makes sense in limited numbers and/or space calibers and firearms is a consideration as is multiple pistols. See what next year brings as things get weird in the courts regardless of who wins next week/month.
Henry Cho had 19 magazines. He didn’t need a magazine capacity ban. What he needed was unarmed victims.
Seung-Hui Cho used a Glock with standard capacity (17 round)mags, and also a Walther P22 with standard (10 round ) mags. I have yet to find a breakdown of what caliber was used on each victim, nor a good reason that another identified and acknowledged nutjob wasn’t locked up or at a minimum under a monitoring system of some sort – but, blame the guns. Oh, don’t forget to regulate chains and padlocks, which he effectively used to secure exit doors to lock students inside. The Nazis used the same devices on the train cars
Baaaa baaaa baaaa “…accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.” baaaa baaaa baaaasaidthe sheep
It’s a good thing that circus court wasn’t around during the Colonial Rebellion, they would have ‘ruled’ that the Colonials were NOT allowed long rifles as that gave them fire superiority over the redcoats.
That makes perfect sense! The criminals will be safer from law abiding citizens!
just ban crime! Thought they took an oath to abide and protect the constitution? Not tear it to shreds. Infringement 101! Typical lib judge.
citizen rights are what the government dictates
Freedom🇺🇸🥰XaxXax
When this goes to the Supreme Court, it will be tossed like dirty dish water
11 rounds is “Extra Large Capacity”?
The 1860 Henry held 15 rounds, and it wasn’t the only “Extra Large Capacity” gun.
I like the Winchester 1907, which despite its innocent-looking wood furniture, was semiautomatic, had 20-round box magazines (“Extra Large Capacity” according to this circuit court!), and fired a cartridge more powerful than the AR-15’s standard 5.56 mm cartridge, the .351 Self-Loading. But it’s not called an “assault weapon” because it doesn’t look scary, despite having all the same features other than looks.
I wish the Winchester 1907 were still made today (chambered in a modern cartridge), because it’s truly a beautiful gun. See the photo of it in the Wikipedia article for Winchester Model 1907 (I can’t provide a link because the TTAG censor-bot sends comments with links to moderation purgatory).
I just posted a comment saying “I can’t provide a link [to a Wikipedia article] because the TTAG censor-bot sends comments with links to moderation purgatory.”
And that comment got sent to moderation purgatory anyway!
“Your comment is awaiting moderation”
Ok, apparently any comment that mentions that TTAG sends comments to moderation automatically gets sent to moderation just for mentioning that comments get sent to moderation, if we describe that moderation using a word that begins with
C and ends with
ENSOR.
11 rounds is “Extra Large Capacity”?
The 1860 Henry held 15 rounds, and it wasn’t the only “Extra Large Capacity” gun.
I like the Winchester 1907, which despite its innocent-looking wood furniture, was semiautomatic, had 20-round box magazines (“Extra Large Capacity” according to this circuit court!), and fired a cartridge more powerful than the AR-15’s standard 5.56 mm cartridge, the .351 Self-Loading. But it’s not called an “assault weapon” because it doesn’t look scary, despite having all the same features other than looks.
I wish the Winchester 1907 were still made today (chambered in a modern cartridge), because it’s truly a beautiful gun. See the photo of it in the Wikipedia article for Winchester Model 1907.