Back in 2013, the city of Los Angeles’s city council proposed an ordinance banning the possession of magazines capable of holding more than ten rounds (so-called “large-capacity” magazines). Unfortunately, on Tuesday, July 28, 2015, after a two year delay, the city council unanimously passed an amended version of this useless ordinance and sent it to the Mayor for his signature, which the Mayor has indicated he is eager to provide.
This ordinance will not prevent violent crime or mass shootings, but it does limit the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding gun owners who choose these magazines to defend themselves and their families. As most gun owners already know, magazines holding more than ten rounds are standard equipment for many popular pistols and rifles, especially those that are selected for defensive purposes. These standard capacity magazines are possessed by millions of law-abiding Americans for a variety of lawful purposes, including self-defense.
If signed into law, people who legally possess magazines over 10 rounds have a 60-day grace period to sell those magazines, remove the magazines from the city, or turn them over to Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD). Unlike California’s magazine law, individuals currently in lawful possession of these magazines will not be protected by a “grandfather” clause. The ordinance effectively amounts to confiscation because the magazines must either be turned-in or removed from within city limits. Either option obviously eliminates the inherent value in these magazines as tools for self-defense.
Sunnyvale and San Francisco have already adopted similar ordinances, and both of those ordinances have been challenged in court. The NRA supported case against the Sunnyvale ordinance is currently awaiting an appeal after the Ninth Circuit ruled against an attempt to prevent the ordinance from going into effect.
These ordinances give insight into what anti-gun activists will pursue if given the opportunity. Law abiding citizens who are in compliance with California’s already burdensome gun laws are not a public safety threat, yet Sunnyvale, San Francisco, and now Los Angeles are seeking to turn the law-abiding into criminals one step at a time. While court battles against these ordinances continue, the best option for gun owners is to ensure that their elected representatives, including those at the local level, understand that ineffective, ideologically-driven restrictions on our Second Amendment rights have consequences at the ballot box.
Los Angeles City Council Targets Law-Abiding With Magazine Ban
Friday, July 31, 2015
Wednesday, September 23, 2026
On September 17, the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) issued a memorandum opinion to answer the question “whether restricting young adults from buying firearms comports with the Second Amendment as the Supreme ...
Wednesday, September 23, 2026
The Trace, the “newsroom” funded by anti-gun extremist Michael Bloomberg, reported in June on the extent to which the NRA-backed NYSRPA v. Bruen case has, to date, rebuilt the modern Second Amendment landscape.
Wednesday, September 23, 2026
Do you know the way to San Jose? Dionne Warwick famously asked in her 1968 hit song. Well, Assistant U.S. Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon certainly does, and she recently made sure the city was served ...
Wednesday, September 23, 2026
The irony is nothing short of comedy. Multiple outlets are having a field day with the Michael Bloomberg-backed Everytown organization, which has spent years and millions of dollars supporting extreme restrictions on lawful gun ownership, ...
Wednesday, September 23, 2026
While it likely comes as no surprise to most readers, a recent study suggests that government-mandates that law-abiding gun owners always secure their firearms when “not in use”—usually unloaded, separate from ammunition, and either in ...
More Like This From Around The NRA

















