Now this case started out in front of Saint Benitez, Judge Roger T. Benitez in the San Diego District Court. He said, you know what, this is an unconstitutional ban, went all the way through the appellate process, through the Ninth Circuit, where they said, you can’t have any rights in this state. No way, you can’t do that. The Supreme Court, like I said, they said, we’re taking it up, we’re ruling, we’re vacating that ruling, go back, you guys screwed up, and use Bruin. Well, they punted it all the way back to Benitez trying to make this go as long as they can, hoping that, you know, they had a different court by the time it got there, because they were hoping maybe that Biden got another term, or Kamala Harris, but that didn’t work out for them, and it made its way all the way back up.

Benitez, again, said yes, it’s still unconstitutional. And finally, yesterday, after months and months and months, we got a ruling from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on Bonk. And while it wasn’t a good one, it was totally expected, but what wasn’t expected was a federal judge dropped a diss track on the Ninth Circuit Court, complete with a video, and the Second Amendment world is on fire over this. California’s large-capacity magazine ban was just upheld in the Ninth Circuit, but Judge Lawrence Van Dyke came in hot with something no one saw coming, a video dissent.

Yeah, you heard that right. A judge recorded a video in his chambers showing how firearms actually work, and it got the anti-gunners fuming. I mean, look, the judge actually has an AK on the wall in his chambers. And from everything I’ve seen in the last 18 hours, this judge deserves to be on the Supreme Court. He is definitely one of us, and I’m glad he put this video out. All right, guys, welcome back to Guns and Gadgets, the premier source for Second Amendment news. This is where I tell you the truth, that the mainstream media won’t touch.

If you support the Second Amendment and want to stay ahead of the fight for our freedoms, hit that subscribe button down below and turn on the notifications so you never miss anything. We’ve got a lot of stuff coming your way. Before I dive in any further, today’s video is proudly sponsored by our friends at TriStar Trading. Save big right now on their Buy One, Get One Free BOGO, and it’s on two different items. Buy one flag and get a flag free, and buy one tag and get a tag free. That’s right, tell everyone how you feel by upping your flag and tag game.

Use my link that’s down below in the description and in the pinned comment, and enter code tags and flags at checkout. Thanks to TriStar Trading for being phenomenal folks right down the road here in Johnson City, Tennessee. All right, let’s get back into the madness out of the Ninth Circuit. Like I said, it was not a huge shock that the Ninth Circuit upheld California’s ban on so-called large capacity magazines, you know, the ones that hold more than 10 rounds and turn you into an assassin. But what did surprise everyone was the way that this judge decided to clap back.

Let’s break this down. Again, after the Supreme Court’s decision in 2022 laid out clear framework saying that any gun law had to align with the history and tradition of the Second Amendment, the Ninth Circuit, like I said, had to go back and reevaluate. Well, that came to an end yesterday, and it’s going to the Supreme Court. I did see that Chuck Michelle over at California rifle and pistol Association said that they’re definitely going to go back to the Supreme Court. And I think that the Supreme Court is going to destroy California on this because they were told, go back and fix it.

And they didn’t fix it. And they basically told the Supreme Court to go somewhere. And I don’t think they’re going to like it. But one of the things that they said in here was that they said that large capacity magazines aren’t even covered by the Second Amendment. That’s two things in a week that some government agency has said that the Second Amendment doesn’t cover things. First was the Department of Justice with suppressors. And here a judge, and it’s not an agency, but it’s a branch of government are saying that magazines aren’t covered by the Second Amendment.

Why? Because they’re just accoutrements, accessories, like a fancy belt buckle or a scope. Seriously, that’s their argument. Their argument was that firearms still fire without the standard capacity magazines. So they don’t count. That’s like saying that your car still runs without seat belts, or it can still drive on three wheels. It’s it’s crazy. What they’re really doing here is dodging the whole common use standard that the Supreme Court has made clear since the Heller decision. And make no mistake, standard capacity magazines holding 15, 17, or even 30 rounds YouTube are in common use across the country.

Millions and millions of Americans own them legally and lawfully, and they don’t do anything bad with them. They’re not tools of criminals. They’re the norm for law abiding gun owners. They come with the damn guns and shame on any cop in the land that has the the balls to just do my job and charge law abiding gun owners with these these offenses. No gun control in this country can take place if law enforcement takes a stand for the Constitution, period. Now let’s talk about Judge Lawrence Van Dyke, the man who stole the show, because he done pissed off his his compadres in the court.

In that move that stunned the legal world, Van Dyke didn’t just dissent. He recorded a video showing himself handling firearms and demonstrating how magazines actually were he brought the debate out of the ivory tower and into the real world via a YouTube video. And the anti-gun judges lost their mind. They lost their mind. Seven of the eight judges in the majority condemned Van Dyke’s video as wildly improper, claiming he introduced facts outside the record and acted like an expert witness. Well, let’s be real. What Van Dyke did was revolutionary. He connected the American people in a way that over 100 pages of legal jargon never could.

I say we need more judges like Judge Van Dyke, not fewer, and we need him now. To make things even more interesting, three Trump-appointed judges dissented along with Van Dyke. Judge Ryan Nelson even said that this decision butchered the Second Amendment and gave a judicial middle finger to the Supreme Court. And he’s not wrong. The Ninth Circuit isn’t just disagreeing. They’re defying the precedent set by the highest court in the land. They’re playing games while your rights hang in the balance. So what’s next? Well, the plaintiffs in this case, like I said, in the Duncan V.

Bonta case, they’re already going to file a cert petition to the United States Supreme Court and they’re going to do it very, very shortly. And the justices might decide whether to take this case before their summer recess in June because this will be a quick one. Now there’s already another magazine ban case in the pipeline that I mentioned earlier and that’s the Ocean State Tactical versus Rhode Island case. But Duncan might be the one that finally forces the Supreme Court to settle this issue once and for all. This fight is far from over and California’s mag ban might not survive another Supreme Court showdown.

But what we’re seeing here is a judiciary at war with itself and with our rights, of course. So what do you think about Judge Van Dyke’s video dissent? Should more judges step outside the box like that? Drop your thoughts in the comments down below. I tried to read as many as I can. I’ll also link Judge Van Dyke’s video in the description. If you value your freedom, hit the subscribe button, give this video a thumbs up and share it with someone who needs to know the truth. Until next time, stay sharp, stay free and stay in the fight.

God bless you. [tr:trw].

See more of Guns & Gadgets 2nd Amendment News on their Public Channel and the MPN Guns & Gadgets 2nd Amendment News channel.