NRA Sues California Over ‘Gunmageddon’ Law

(Daily Caller News Foundation) The National Rifle Association is suing the state of California over a law restricting magazine capacity to 10 bullets or less the organization argues is an unconstitutional limitation.

Gun Sales Have Fallen Since Obama Left Office

Photo by Mike Saechang

The NRA Institute for Legislative Action (ILA) and the California Rifle and Pistol Association (CRPA) are spearheading the lawsuit, the second launched by the NRA this year against the state. The lawsuit, filed Thursday in federal court in San Diego, is part of the NRA’s efforts to counter an array of new gun laws in California, collectively referred to by Second Amendment enthusiasts as “gunmageddon,” enacted in the wake of the 2015 San Bernardino terrorist attack, reports Los Angeles Times.

The law bans the sale and possession of magazines with an ammunition capacity greater than 10. The NRA argues in the lawsuit, Duncan v. Becerra, the magazine restrictions are unconstitutional, violating the due process clause.

“Legislators in California routinely enact laws that only affect the law-abiding and do nothing to enhance public safety,” Chris Cox, executive director of the NRA-ILA, said in a statement. “This lawsuit, and others that will follow, is an effort to ensure the rights of law-abiding gun owners are respected in California.”

Gun owners have long owned high capacity magazines in California and argue that the state retroactively banning and seizing the property tramples on their due process rights.

The NRA filed their first lawsuit aimed at the restrictive set of gun laws in California April 24, challenging a measure banning the sale and possession of semiautomatic rifles equipped with bullet buttons, which allow the user to change magazines relatively quickly. They argue this is a violation of the taking clause in the constitution, which protects against seizure of private property without just compensation from the government.

Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom ripped the NRA lawsuit as a “deceitful agenda” and said their efforts will fail.

Republished with permission from Daily Caller News Foundation via iCopyright license.

  • roger dodger

    Why not just threaten the the little stupid fat ugly kid in N Korea, his missiles can’t get past Ca, Or and Washington, no harm done if they wipe it out.

    • Greg

      Remember the saying “fear the beaureaucrat” who fears your guns? Two men could have killed as many people in the San Bernardino massacre with bows and arrows as well without a gun

      • Bill

        the libturds tell stories but they don’t tell the WHOLE story. And if truth were a rubber band, the rubber band would be broken.

      • Kathryn Jordan

        I doubt that two men could have killed as many people in the San Bernardino massacre with bows and arrows. The kinds of guns that were used in that massacre were guns that the military is only supposed to be allowed to use.

        • Greg

          Your the type of person dictators love as they can swoop down on you, take away your gun as well as your rights without firing a shot. By the way, ever heard of exploring bullets? They can be used in concealable handguns and be just as deadly or more so as any military weapon and what about using vehicles as weapons? You can slaughter as many people as the above as was done. Shouldn’t we ban them also?

        • NukeWaste

          Quit your BS! You know nothing at all. You also prove that you know nothing about bows and arrows either. You belong living in CA.

          • Kathryn Jordan

            I know more than you do. Living in California is too expensive. There is no way I can afford an apartment let alone a house when houses are going for millions of dollars. I like to visit my parents who live in California, but I am glad I don’t live there with all the earthquake they get. Dealing with that when I was a teenager was enough for me. At least Ohio doesn’t get earthquakes.

  • whistlepigger

    If I’m not mistaken the NRA is fighting a bigger battle than 10rd. magazines in the PDR of MD over the gun control act of 2014, and so far no victory.

    • whistlepigger

      Just learned a bit more than this article covers. has the details, such as registration by 2018 on all “assault” weapons, if one cares to follow the new law. Maybe it is as bad or worse than the PDR of MD.

  • Loyd Patterson

    California has public officials that should be fired. Brown and his croneys are dictateing how many rounds you can have in your rifle, I bet those croneys never faced a mountain lion back packing, those extra rounds can mean the difference between life or death. People of California vote those dictators out of office, and elect officials that have common sense.

    • badass


    • Debra Shawver

      They should be arrested for sedition and treason…pure and simple

    • Jeffrey Bagwell

      Brown and his corrupt Godless marxists have a long list of evil and unlawful acts. Brown was an evil Governor 39 years ago, he has only gotten worse. He is the epitome of a dictator and corruption out of control.

      • Nevadavoter1

        Linda Ronstadt still has his manhood locked in a box on her mantel!

    • fishunter

      I did not know that mountain lions went back packing! Ha Ha Ha – just joking, actually you are right, but the most dangerous animal out there walks on two legs. By limiting the law abiding gun owner, the state may be signing his/her death warrant because, I say again, criminals and murderers don’t care about the laws.

      • Nevadavoter1

        You are correct! See my comment above… when guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns!

    • Mic

      They passed a law once to restrict governors to 2 terms. But a crony Brown appointed to the states legal group went and ruler that Browns 2 terms served before the law did not apply.

  • kassa1

    I just seen where the people in California are up in arms because the politicians want to jack your taxes up again so they can keep their illegals on the dole. This is Tyranny I am the second amendment was written to protect us from Tierney get rid of the lock and load people because it’s coming down the tracks like a freight train this is why they want you disarm so they could steal everything you got your home and your land will be next. Just remember what the Democrat party did to the American Indian they disarm them slaughtered them and put them on the reservation and stole their land.

    • rick meek

      Add the east coast to your post and you’ll be spot on……

    • that was the US government-both parties,in fact when it started the Republican party wasn’t even in existence

    • ABachelorgirl

      I love your comment, esp. the first sentence. It is tyranny and I want out.

  • will

    Its unconstitutional in that it puts the militias at a severe disadvantage should that have to face federal troops. We already have to deal with the fact if we are outnumbered, they have FULL auto, and can rain fire superiority on us. I think its better to die free then to live under CA communism

    • yep and just one of the reasons i have to leave my beloved home state!

    • Nevadavoter1

      The reason that Japan did not attempt to invade the US towards the end of WW II was because the Emporer understood that most Americans were armed and would defend their country even though they were not members of the armed forces!

  • don’t understand the “taking clause” but i do know all about the California anti-gun anti-hunting agenda

    • Reflect

      Just wondering…. what is California not anti, besides being perverted?

      • not anti-illegal immigrant,not anti-gay marriage definitely not anti-Communist,they just passed a law allowing card carrying members to hold office!

        • Greg

          Where does it.say in the U.S.
          constitution the guns can only
          be used for spot? Huh?

          • i never said that it did-or self-defense for that matter…the Founding Fathers foresaw that even with their near perfect vision of government,tyrants might take over,and fully intended to enable the people to be able to set it right

    • Kathryn Jordan

      I don’t understand the “taking clause” myself. What is the California anti-gun anti-hunting agenda?

      • ever tighter restrictions on ammo,and guns of course – and even when and where you can hunt-raising the price of hunting licenses&tags.Now we’re supposed to switch over to expensive copper ammo-it never stops,pretty soon you just decide to go out of state since it is getting so expensive here

        • Kathryn Jordan

          Thanks for explaining the California anti-gun anti-hunting agenda to me. Ohio doesn’t have that kind of law; just the usual hunting season. I don’t know if the state will switch to what California wants you to buy for ammo, or if it will remain the same.

          • you’re welcome! if you don’t live in Ca. it is difficult to believe;just a warning to the other states: there used to be a saying”as California goes,so goes the nation”

  • Barry Wendell Jackson, Esq.

    Few posting here (and the LAME STREAM MEDIA), male and
    female, age 17-45, realize they probably are members of
    the U.S. Militia and their
    State/District/Commonwealth/Possession Militia. See 10
    U.S. Code 311 and 312. Local militias may be indexed under
    National Guard, which is the Organized Militia. Most of
    the rest of us, not active military, are members of the
    Unorganized Militia. If younger, they probably will
    become, if older, they probably have been members.

    The Unorganized Militia are authorized, at their own
    expense, to acquire, keep, and bear, infantry (or
    comparable) arms. No permit is needed to acquire

    “Gun Control” was initiated in the Reconstruction Era in
    the South, to prevent Freed Blacks from acquiring firearms
    to defend themselves against the Ku Klux Klan.

    Roy Innis of the Congress of Racial Equality was a long
    time board member of the NRA. Condoleeza Rice remembers
    her father holding a rifle at the ready to protect the
    family during the Birmingham Riots.

    Those seeking Gun Control, as in California, are seeking
    to disarm the Militia.

    • ex-Confederates were permitted to retain ONE long arm no sidearms;ostensibly to protect the family and or hunt for subsistence-so it would seem the Yankees started gun control,after all! i will cede to you that the NRA was started by Yankees in 1871,so that was good…

  • Ron

    The liberal/communist Governor, Lt Gov and the Dems of CA have turned the once beautiful CA into a socialist state along with high taxes and more and more liberal madness; very sad…

    • LoriandMichael Dilello-Utley

      So so true…..,,,,

    • ABachelorgirl

      And into a liberal run multicult sh**hole.

  • rueangel

    One of my ,..’favorite’,.. California gun laws is the law that requires one to carry any gun, being transported, in a car, to carry that gun in the locked trunk of the car.
    The,..’logic’,..of.this law,..I suppose,.. is that it will prevent drive by shootings,,..because,.. of coarse ‘gangbangers’ will follow this law, & lock their gun in the trunks of their cars…

    But, then, of coarse the only thing that this law,..’really’,.. accomplishes is to give any carjacker a pleasant surprise, when he finds the gun in the drunk, after,..’jacking’,.. some, DEFENSELESS motorist.

    While on the other hand, in neighboring Nevada, one is allowed to carry a LOADED, gun in the driver’s compartment.

    So, in Nevada, a carjacker, might also get a surprise,.. but it won’t be as pleasant of a surprise, as he would get, had he confined his carjacking to California, where the law assures the,..’safety’,.. of carjackers, by dis-arming the,..honest’,..motorist.

    • Nevadavoter1

      That is why I have a CCW and pack when driving! Just remember to keep both hands on the wheel if you are pulled over! The cops get very nervous if you don’t! Only reach for something if the cop asks you to and ALWAYS tell them you are armed!

  • Peter Bradin

    Point A: There is nothing in the U.S. Constitution that says gun owners have the right to large sized magazines. Nobody reasonably needs a magazine with a capacity larger than 10 bullets for their personal use or for hunting. Point B; The government has previously banned various items that were previously legal. The most famous example was when alcohol, which was previously legal, was banned during prohibition. There is no legally viable argument that could use a constitutional argument against this proposed law. The NRA uses these proposed laws to convince gun owners that the Democrats want to move towards taking away all their guns. It is not true. During the early years of the Obama administration the NRA convinced their membership that Obama would be “coming for their guns”. Gun sales rose dramatically because uneducated people were driven by fear that this would happen any day. Obama and the Democratic party never proposed any blanket ban on guns. There was some discussion about restricting large capacity magazines and automatic AR-15 style weapons. These are not normally used in hunting or home defense. There were some proposed rules about restricting weapons purchases by people with violent histories, convicted felons or people with a history of mental disorders. The gun lobby rose up against these common-sense rules. This proposed California law is yet another proposed common-sense law. These are the magazines of choice used by mass murderers, not the general public. The NRA is sounding yet another false alarm, but it does rile up their base and creates more contributions to their organization and increases gun sales every time they do this. It is a marketing tactic, nothing more.

    • Brent

      Your right, the Constitution doesn’t say “citizens will be permitted to own weapons with more than 10 rounds.” Of course there was no such thing in the 1700’s. But the 2A was created with the intent of preserving the peoples ability to resist a tyrannical government. The thought that the 2A was not created to preserve citizens rights to own personal weaponry capable of being carried by an individual is ludicrous on its face. Remember the “Minute Men?” They possessed rifles that were identical to the British rifle in their ability to fire projectiles.

      Your point “B” is entirely irrelevant. The “Right to drink” wasn’t assigned an amendment number of 1-10. Arms is #2.

      Obama and “D’s” in general make constant attempts to chip away at the populations ability to posess arms. Ammunition for many firearms was unavailable or seriously high priced for 75% of Obama’s time in office. He attempted to ban specific ammunition. At every step of a a public killing involving a firearm, “Dems” refuse to let the crisis go to waste and make the kneejerk toward creating laws disigned to chip away at the 2A. Yet the conveniently ignore the facts indicating that “gun free” zones should be renamed “human hunting zones” because people intent on harm know that the likelihood of some random target having a gun to shoot back is much less. They also ignore overwhelming data suggesting that the harder it is for people to own weapons legally, the bigger the weapon problem is in criminal circles. Look no further than Chicago.

      Your suggestion that “common sense” measures are not tailored to disarm citizenry is very short cited. NICS already prevents people with violent histories from purchasing firearms. There is no such thing as a “gun show or internet loophole.” Just for the sake of trying, I proved this to myself. I couldn’t get around the NICS check, no matter what method I tried. As long as people selling guns are following the law, it doesn’t happen. There is NO NEED FOR FURTHER LAWS to muddy the waters.

      In fact, the vast majority of liberal ideologies claiming to be “common sense” fall far short. If this was a “perfect world,” then liberal ideologies would work. But in reality, we have to contend with human nature, and also people intent on bad behavior. Asside from that, a “no-buy” list is going to work about as well as the “no-fly” list that even members of congress have found themselves on inadvertently. Just like in the criminal justice system, it’s better to let 100 guilty people go free than to incarcerate 1 innocent one, the principle of denying worthy people of their rights is equally abhorrent.

      Terrorists are now killing people in large numbers with vehicles. 9-11 did not involve firearms.

      But before you go on “vilifying” the “gun-lobby” just remember where their money comes from. The NRA is largely funded by citizens chosing to pay for memberships. Firearms manufacturers get their money from legal firearm sales. That is to say, that citizens are funding them. Yes…some citizens do harm with them, but they’re by-far the minority. Why is it that not a single democrat would dream of banning cars, but having a gun go off and do harm immediately ellicits that knee jerk? Is there something deeper going on there??? Of course there is, and if you sit back far enough to take in the big picture, it becomes obvious.

      Make no mistake. If there was absolutely no pushback against the democrats on this, we would all be disarmed. Please take a look at the history of gun control, and what happens when the citizens are disarmed. Then take a look at our country. Our country is financially broke, morally “challenged,” a political party did everything they could to manipulate their primary and subvert the electoral process, people who do not agree with the “progressive” cause are vilified and there’s much more. THE LAST THING OUR COUNTRY NEEDS NOW, IS GUN CONTROL.

      • Cat Woman

        I wish I could give you 1000 thumbs up! I am 66 years old, have COPD, weigh 80 lbs. Without a gun (yes, I have one) what chance would I have against almost anyone.

        • Kathryn Jordan

          I am glad that you are able to own a gun. With a seizure disorder, I am unable to own a firearm.

      • Kathryn Jordan

        I would rather see “gun control” for common sense purposes. What people do realize is that it is better to have this to protect the public. Ex-convicts, people with mental problems, and those who may have possible “terrorist” ties need to have guns kept out of their hands. Is that too much for the NRA to understand? One would think that they would be happy to protect citizens from these people who should not have guns in the first place. I respect the 2nd Amendment, but I don’t want to see those types of people with guns. Is it too much to ask for gun control to keep guns out of the hands of these people?

        • Brent

          Thats the thing though. Convicts, and people adjudicated as mentally ill are already prohibited from owning/purchasing/using a firearm. No more laws can be made to further reduce the likelihood of them obtaining weapons. You can make all kinds of laws making it what you believe impossible for evil-doers to obtain weapons and it will have negligible, if any effect on these people to procure those weapons. Terrorists…same thing, and if they happen to find firearms hard to come by, they turn (and are doing so increasingly now) to vehicles, knives and other weapons.

          I know “gun control” sounds good, but the practical application of it has no real effect. Once again, look at Chicago. The only way to protect people from bad actors with guns is to promote responsible gun ownership. Crime goes down when criminals know that there is an increased chance that random witness’s and potential victims may be armed. It actually enters into their thought process that the risk-benefit analysis changes.

          And there is no overcoming the fact that an armed population is the only true way to prevent or keep a tyrannical government in check.

          • Kathryn Jordan

            The problem is, those who have been incarcerated or who have a mental illness can still find a way around the loophole where they can own/purchase/ and use a firearm. Then you have friends of people who are “possible” terrorists who can purchase guns for them; look at what happened at San Bernadino. Friends of those terrorists purchased guns for the two people who open fired of those people.

            Yes, gun control is a good idea but it can’t always be possible. I respect those law abiding citizens who own guns just as I respect the 2nd Amendment.

    • Cat Woman

      If the democrats and Obama had their way, I would have happened “any day”.

    • NukeWaste

      You are completely full of crap. Please stay in CA!

  • Jmanjo

    Jerry Brown is a nitwit of the first order. Only California, with a history of defying reason, could have elected someone this naïve and crazy. He is a danger to the state and its residents as he persists in denying them a means of self protection and security.

  • fishunter

    California is a terrible example for the individuals rights. In any liberal agenda, common sense and individual rights take a back seat to the ‘TOUCHY-FEELEY”. Unfortunately, Colorado is not far behind. We the people must change the leadership in our states.

  • Diane Leef

    California is a lost cause at this point! Watched some videos about protesters out there and they have completely lost their minds!

  • bob laford

    Listen people California is, weather wise a fine State to live, but so are so many other States. I moved out 17 years ago to Colorado & don’t miss the traffic, pollution, crime rates, high taxes, gas prices , the long lines at stores & DMV, electricity rates, GUN laws, Politicians, or the earthquakes.

    • Kathryn Jordan

      That is true about high taxes, gas prices plus the earthquakes. I never liked the earthquakes when lived there. I moved to be closer to my grandparents in Ohio since none of my cousins were close enough to keep an eye on them. Even here in Ohio, we have gun laws that people are supposed to obey; not that many do. The one thing that I don’t approve is the concealed weapons in bars. It is bad enough that you have drunk driving, but now you have to worry about weapons in bars and the “possibility” of a gun going off in a bar by someone who is drunk.

      • NukeWaste

        So, don’t go to any bars. In fact, stay home. Hide in your basement.

        • Kathryn Jordan

          I don’t go to bars anyway. I am not allowed to drink because I take medication for a seizure disorder; alcohol and my medication do not mix. I can’t own a gun. A car is as lethal as a concealed weapon when a person is drunk. I respect the 2nd Amendment; I am not saying that law abiding citizens (who have common sense to keep their guns in a safe place away from their children, have their concealed weapons not in a position where it could go off accidentally) to be careful if they do take their weapons in bars. There are people in those places that don’t believe in guns.

    • definitely one of the possible options! just got back from Texas,but man it is hot-takes me about 2 weeks to acclimate…but i have been looking for a bolthole for awhile now…

    • i’m curious about Colorado,i’d heard that Weld County is conservative,but around certain areas it was just as liberal as California(i’d assume Boulder,Denver,etc.)don’t they have a Democrat governor?

  • jackhy

    I sympathize with CA lawful gun owners, but even if NRA wins this battle, they cannot win the war in that awfully managed and sanctuary state. However, here in NYS we are almost as bad under Gov. King Coumo and our sanctuary cities!

  • Jackson Brannon

    If N Korea has Nuclear capabilities I hope California is the first place they strike!! Seriously, I think Trump should stay out of it until they flatten California THEN flatten the little fat mop headed nut case!!

    • Kathryn Jordan

      I sure don’t want that to happen. I have family and friends who live in California and I don’t want to see anything happen to them especially from North Korea. What state do you live in? You are being rather ugly with your statement.

      • Jackson Brannon

        I think California is being rather Ugly, murderous, treasonous, anti american and Communist!! Are your friends Illegals or are they the ones who think a few Americans should die so the illegals can stay!!!

        • Kathryn Jordan

          These are my high school friends. I don’t know what their political backgrounds so I have no idea if they think illegals can stay. My friends are not illegals. California is not ugly, murderous, treasonous, anti American or communist. I would have to say that you are an ugly person, who is anti-American and Communist. If North Korea has nuclear capabilities, I hope they flatten you.

          • Jackson Brannon

            I bet you and Hitlary would love to remove ALL of our Constitutional rights just like your Libturd friends in California!! You should move there so you can enjoy the crimes of the Illegals and be defenseless!! Sounds like your cup of tea!!

          • Kathryn Jordan

            It’s too expensive to move back to California. I am not advocating that law abiding citizens who own guns should be penalized. What I am saying is that having concealed guns in bars is not a good idea. When you have someone who is drunk, would you want them to have a concealed weapon at a bar? A car is just as lethal when someone is driving drunk. I respect the 2nd. Amendment.

          • Jackson Brannon

            No one EVER said Californias strict abusive gun laws have anything to do with bars!! The way they attack gun owners and their rights are atrocious!! Try getting a concealed carry permit!! Even buying ammo is getting impossible!! It is also illegal!!!!!!

  • Mike Zimmerman

    The USA has the most guns of any country in the world per 100,000 people. The USA has the most ammunition of any country in the world per 100,000 people. The USA also has the most gun deaths of any country in the world per 100,000 people. The USA has the most mass shootings of any country in the world per 100,000 people. So please tell me how having more guns and ammo has made the people of the USA any safer?? Britain and Australia haven’t had any mass shootings in 40 years. We can’t go a month without one. You read all the time about a child finding an unsecured gun and either shooting themselves or someone else accidentally. We have a serious problem with guns in this country that needs addressed. And please, before you respond about other ways people die in this country other than guns, don’t bother. Stay on topic. There are far to many tragic, needless and preventable gun deaths in this country. Let’s focus on ways that actually prevent them. It’s quite obvious that having more guns and ammo isn’t preventing them.

  • rick meek

    GO NRA – the tough part is Brown doing the dirty to the people that can’t escape CA…..

  • Jenny Rau Gagliardi

    California’s government in general has a personal agenda and they are trying to use the law and tax dollars to circumvent our constitutional rights. Governor Brown is at the head of this atrocious attitude

    • Kathryn Jordan

      People don’t need magazines with ammunition capacity greater than 10. Just look at what happened in San Bernadino. Those people had fire arms that the military is allowed to carry and yet somehow they got their hands on those guns. Get over it and deal with the fact that Governor Brown is trying to protect the citizens of California. He is also trying to protect those law abiding citizens who own guns.

      • Ed Shirley Helms


      • ABachelorgirl

        Brown is doubling down to protect criminal illegal aliens from deportation and resettles Muslim refugees who want to kill us like the terrorists you just gave as an example. I assure you, Jerry Brown is not trying to protect us.

      • NukeWaste

        Did you really write this crap? You know little to nothing about arms. I don’t care about any Californians that get killed. You brought this crap on yourselves. Why don’t all of you move to Mexico? You could have the government that you deserve.