FMJ News

Alternative News Stories You Can't Dodge

  • Home
  • Breaking News
  • Editor’s Picks
  • Alternative News Videos
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
You are here: Home / SHTF Plan / Federal Judge Blocks California Magazine Confiscation Law: “The Constitution Is A Shield From The Tyranny Of The Majority”

Federal Judge Blocks California Magazine Confiscation Law: “The Constitution Is A Shield From The Tyranny Of The Majority”

July 4, 2017 By SHTF Plan Leave a Comment

rifle-magazine

It’s no secret that people on the left have a disdain for our representative form of government. That’s why they threw such a big fit over the electoral college system after the last election. They don’t like the idea that laws and elections aren’t determined by the will of the majority, and they don’t recognize how dangerous that would be for everyone’s freedom (or worse, in some cases they know exactly how dangerous it would be).

But their hatred for our constitutional republic extends beyond the electoral college. They would prefer to live under a pure democracy, where the majority of the population can trash the rights of the minority. They would rather live under a system where individual rights are sacrificed for their twisted version of “the common good.”

Fortunately, that’s not the system we live under. In this country, your rights can’t be taken away just because most people think those rights are dangerous. That fact was made abundantly clear recently, when a judge in California filed a preliminary injunction against a law that would force gun owners to give up large capacity magazines that had been bought legally before they were banned. The injunction effectively prevents California from enforcing the law for the time being.

“The Court does not lightly enjoin a state statute, even on a preliminary basis,” Judge Benitez said in the ruling. “However, just as the Court is mindful that a majority of California voters approved Proposition 63 and that the government has a legitimate interest in protecting the public from gun violence, it is equally mindful that the Constitution is a shield from the tyranny of the majority. Plaintiffs’ entitlements to enjoy Second Amendment rights and just compensation are not eliminated simply because they possess ‘unpopular’ magazines holding more than 10 rounds.”

Judge Benitez also feared that Proposition 63 would turn millions of law abiding citizens into criminals.

“If this injunction does not issue, hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of otherwise law-abiding citizens will have an untenable choice: become an outlaw or dispossess one’s self of lawfully acquired property,” he said in the ruling. “That is a choice they should not have to make. Not on this record.”

But as you might expect, not everyone is pleased with the ruling. State attorney general and former Democratic representative Xavier Becerra was quick to criticize the ruling.

“Proposition 63 was overwhelmingly approved by voters to increase public safety and enhance security in a sensible and constitutional way,” Becerra said in a statement on the ruling. “Restricting large capacity magazines and preventing them from ending up in the wrong hands is critical for the well-being of our communities. I will defend the will of California voters because we cannot continue to lose innocent lives due to gun violence.”

Of course, there’s no evidence to suggest that magazine capacity laws are in any way constitutional, nor is there any proof that they would actually reduce gun violence. In fact, anyone with any firearm expertise can prove that magazine capacity limits are no barrier for a criminal or mass shooter.

But that doesn’t matter to liberals like Xavier Becerra. He has his agenda, and he thinks the “will of California voters” trumps the fundamental rights of every resident in his state. Thank god we don’t live in a pure democracy, or we would have lost all of our rights long ago.

Related:

Why We Have a Second Amendment: Venezuela Plans to Give Firearms to Loyalists So They Can Purge Growing Resistance

The Attack on the Second Amendment is not Finished

Liberal Media Calls for Mass Gun Confiscation in America: “The Second Amendment Must Go”

New Bill Aims To Rewrite Second Amendment: Would Require Gun Owners To Have Liability Insurance

Original Source shtfplan.com

Filed Under: SHTF Plan

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Article Search

Get Your FMJ News Updates Here

  • Facebook
  • RSS

Stay In the Know!

Sign up to receive email news updates!

*We won't share your info with anyone.

More Alternative News

www.allamericangold.com
www.alt-market.com
www.endoftheamericandream.com
www.drudgereport.com
www.infowars.com
www.intellihub.com
www.kitco.com
www.mcalvany.com
www.oathkeepers.org
www.patriotnetdaily.com
www.rutherford.org
www.shtfplan.com
www.shtfschool.com
www.stratfor.com
www.survivalblog.com
www.theburningplatform.com
www.thedailysheeple.com
www.theeconomiccollapseblog.com
www.thenewamerican.com
www.wnd.com
www.zerohedge.com

Recent Posts

  • Major Tax Increases Are About To Slam America As Cities & States Want You To Pay For COVID Fallout
  • Kim’s Sister Rules Out Further Talks With Trump, Vows Peace As Long As “U.S. Doesn’t Touch Us”
  • “Defund The Police” Just Means “I’m Rich & White”
  • Sonoma Hotel Employs Robot For Contactless Room Service 
  • Matt Taibbi: “It Was Like Watching Bruce Springsteen And Dionne Warwick Be Pelted With Dogshit For Singing We Are the World”

Archives

  • July 2020 (58)
  • June 2020 (81)
  • May 2020 (175)
  • April 2020 (197)
  • March 2020 (1)
  • January 2018 (25)
  • December 2017 (18)
  • November 2017 (17)
  • October 2017 (40)
  • September 2017 (22)
  • August 2017 (21)
  • July 2017 (100)
  • June 2017 (18)
  • May 2017 (2)
  • April 2017 (3)
  • December 1969 (105)

Home

RSS

News Tip Us

Privacy Policy

Terms of Service

© 2021 FMJ News. All Rights Reserved