NRA sues S.F. to kill law on gun magazines Group seeking to block limits on ammo magazines

The National Rifle Association sued San Francisco on Tuesday, claiming the city violated the constitutional right to possess guns for self-defense with a new ordinance banning possession of magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition.

The measure, passed unanimously by city supervisors last month and signed by Mayor Ed Lee on Nov. 8, expands San Francisco's existing ban on sales of large-capacity gun magazines. Effective on Dec. 8, it gives owners of those magazines 90 days to turn them over to police. Law enforcement officers and armored-car personnel are exempt.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2008 that law-abiding Americans have a constitutional right to possess handguns in their home for self-defense. In the lawsuit filed in federal court in San Francisco, NRA lawyers argued that weapons holding more than 10 cartridges are in the same category.

"These magazines are typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes, including in-home self-defense," said the suit, filed on behalf of the San Francisco Veteran Police Officers Association and four individual gun owners, led by a retired police officer.

"Limiting magazine capacity for law-abiding citizens to 10 rounds decreases public safety by giving violent criminals an advantage and thus decreasing the likelihood that a victim will survive a criminal attack," the suit said.

The gun organization also plans to sue Sunnyvale, where voters approved a similar ordinance by 2-to-1 on Nov. 5. State legislators passed a bill that would have prohibited the sale or possession of semiautomatic rifles capable of holding a detachable magazine of any size, but Gov. Jerry Brown vetoed it last month.

City Attorney Dennis Herrera said San Francisco "is prepared to litigate aggressively to defend gun-safety laws that save lives," observing that the city is "one of the NRA's top targets."

Herrera's office is also defending San Francisco ordinances requiring handgun owners to keep their weapons locked when stored at home, and banning bullets that expand or splinter on contact. A federal judge rejected NRA-backed attempts last year to block both measures.

Since the Supreme Court ruling that overturned a Washington, D.C., ban on possessing handguns in the home, the NRA has filed numerous suits claiming Second Amendment protection for other types of firearms and weapons transactions.

The NRA contends the 2008 ruling was not limited to handguns, citing Justice Antonin Scalia's comment in the majority opinion that the government can outlaw "dangerous and unusual weapons" that are not "typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes." Magazines that carry more than 10 rounds are widely sold in the United States and can't be considered "dangerous and unusual," Tuesday's lawsuit asserted.

So far, no court has overturned a law banning high-capacity guns or magazines, and several state courts have upheld California's prohibition on sales of most types of semiautomatic weapons.