Federal Judge Temporarily Blocks California's New Magazine Ban

6/29/17 Associated Press:

SACRAMENTO, Calif. –  A federal judge is blocking a California law set to go into effect Saturday that would have barred gun owners from possessing high-capacity ammunition magazines.

San Diego-based U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez said in ruling Thursday that the law banning possession of magazines containing more than 10 bullets would have made criminals of thousands of otherwise law-abiding citizens who now own the magazines.He issued a preliminary injunction backing the legal challenge by the National Rifle Association-affiliated California Rifle & Pistol Association.

California Attorney General Xavier Becerra (HAH-vee-air Bah-sehr'-ah), who is defending the state law, did not immediately comment.

The judge says the law approved by voters in November takes away gun owners' Second Amendment rights and amounts to the government taking people's private property without compensation.

Don't get too excited.  Such preliminary injunctions only prevent enforcement while the matter is litigated, and are based on the judge's perception f who is likely to win.  It says a lot about the general insanity of California voters that this was passed by initiative.

The judge's injunction points out that the 9th Circuit's method for determining if a right is protected: "It is, unfortunately, an overly complex analysis that people of ordinary intelligence cannot be expected to understand."

More goodness:

Some conclusions can be drawn from the Mayor’s survey submitted by the Attorney General. Of the ten mass shooting events that occurred in California, only two involved the use of a magazine holding more than 10 rounds. In view of the large population of California and the five-year time period studied, it appears that the Prop 63 amendments to § 32310 aim to eliminate that which is an incredibly rare danger to public safety. Moreover, based on this preliminary evidentiary record submitted by the Attorney General, § 32310 is a poor fit as a means to eliminate the types of mass shooting events experienced in California. In other words, § 32310 appears to be a poor fit as a means for the State to achieve its four important objectives.