Skip to main content
Report this ad

See also:

Black robed scoundrels allow bans on high capacity gun mags

Politicians and some citizens wish to ban gun magazines that hold "too many bullets" in their view.
Politicians and some citizens wish to ban gun magazines that hold "too many bullets" in their view.
Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images

The black robed scoundrels of the U.S. Supreme Court have struck again. Justice Anthony Kennedy, who handles Supreme Court emergency appeals for California and eight other western states, refused to block the enforcement of new gun control laws in California that would ban standard sized magazines, according to SFGate today.

This means that towns and cities in California can proceed with the enforcement of the new law that will prevent citizens from using magazines that carry more than 10 "rounds" or bullets. Sunnyvale is one of the towns in question, along with San Francisco.

Sunnyvale held a referendum in November of 2013 during which 66 percent of voters approved the magazine ban.

But as SFGate reported,

A group of gun owners sued to overturn the Sunnyvale ordinance and asked a federal judge to block its enforcement, arguing that tens of millions of Americans legally own guns with high-capacity magazines and may sometimes need them to repel criminal attacks.

Their request was rejected.

San Francisco is next on the agenda as the courts have ruled in favor of its new law designed to do the same thing as Sunnyvale's:

San Francisco's ordinance, approved by the Board of Supervisors and signed by Mayor Ed Lee in November, is scheduled to take effect April 7. Other gun owners and a group of retired police officers, also represented by Michel and his firm, sued to overturn the ordinance but were denied an injunction Feb. 23 by another federal judge, William Alsup.

They have also appealed to the Ninth Circuit and would need an order from that court, or from the Supreme Court, to block enforcement. The prospect of any such order was apparently eliminated by the high court's rebuff of the Sunnyvale plaintiffs Wednesday.

The actions of citizens and the courts in these matters raise yet again the issue of whether or not a "majority vote" can negate the rights and liberties protected by the Constitution. The Bill of Rights was added to the Constitution by the Framers precisely in order to protect certain enumerated rights from a majority vote of citizens or an intrusion of the courts or any other government entity that would encroach upon those rights.

Thus, in the purest sense and in the view of the Framers, such laws as the ones approved by Sunnyvale and San Francisco are illegal and therefore carry absolutely no mandate that citizens obey.


My latest entry is now available at my blog at The Liberty Sphere under the section, "Musings After Midnight." It is titled, "The latest news from the underground patriot movement, including warnings of more gov't harassment of conservatives, libertarians, and gun owners."


Read one of my most popular entries on my blog in the popular series, Musings After Midnight, titled, "The Stealth War."

My series "Musings After Midnight" is now indexed at my blog, The Liberty Sphere.

You may also wish to visit my ministry site at Martin Christian Ministries.

Report this ad