Court: California Can’t Confiscate Magazines that Hold More Than 10 Rounds

Image: bearing Arms
Image: Bearing Arms

Magazines holding more than ten rounds were grandfathered into a 2000 California law but in 2016 voters approved a measure to confiscate “large capacity Magazines” effective July 1st. That hasn’t happened. The court stopped the planned confiscation at the end of June.

You can read a detailed history of the case in great at the Volokh Conspiracy, but I wanted to share two quotes from the article that relates to California’s defense of the confiscation because they are priceless.

With regard to data sets used by the California AG’s office to prove their case, (emphasis mine)

…the A.G. had two databases about mass shootings in the United States. One was from Mother Jones magazine. “Mother Jones magazine has rarely been mentioned by any court as reliable evidence. It is fair to say that the magazine survey lacks some of the earmarks of a scientifically designed and unbiased collection of data,” wrote the court.


The second database of mass shootings came from Michael Bloomberg’s “Mayors Against Illegal Guns,” which has now merged into Bloomberg’s “Everytown” organization. The Bloomberg data set covered mass shootings from 2009 to 2013. Benitez reviewed it carefully and found that is “tends to prove the opposite of a justification for (confiscation), i.e., it tends to prove there is no need to dispossess and criminalize law-abiding responsible citizens currently possessing magazines holding more than 10 rounds.”

“Data” from Mother Jones and Mayors Against Illegal Guns/Everytown “gunned down” by a Federal Court Judge. That should be less surprising than the fact that the AG of the State of California couldn’t do any better than that, but is it?

Like I said, priceless.