• @MicroWaveOP
    link
    171 year ago

    U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut ruled that banning large capacity magazines and requiring a permit to purchase a gun falls in line with “the nation’s history and tradition of regulating uniquely dangerous features of weapons and firearms to protect public safety,” Oregon Public Broadcasting reported.

    • BombOmOm
      link
      5
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      They are going to have a hard time proving magazine capacity limits have historical precedent on appeal. Such gun control was only implemented within the last few decades.

      • commandar
        link
        fedilink
        41 year ago

        I also can’t see this part surviving appeal:

        Large capacity magazines “are not commonly used for self-defense, and are therefore not protected by the Second Amendment,” Immergut wrote.

        Oregon set the capacity limit at 10 rounds. Practically every handgun commonly used for self-defense has a capacity of at least 15.

        • BaroqueInMind
          link
          fedilink
          0
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          The judge is dumb because I, an idiot, can not read anywhere in the U.S. Constitution where it says the Second Amendment was written with self-defense in mind.

          It literally only says that everyone can own a firearm because a militia (an organization that exists outside of the military or law enforcement institutions, but answers to a state governor) is necessary to maintain a free country protected from any threats to the country.

          And a militia can’t exist without regular people being able to own guns, so they can train with them, hence where it says “well regulated militia”: meaning in good working order. You can’t have a militia in good working order without being able to train with your firearm.

      • @Blamemeta
        link
        -11 year ago

        Well, older than that. Gun control are the last of the Jim Crow laws. Its why you have to pay giant tax stamps and get permits and all, its to keep minorities from arming themselves.

          • BaroqueInMind
            link
            fedilink
            11
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Where’d you hear this hot take?

            Here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here

            We can keep going if you want more links and maybe a peer-reviewed study. Any form of limiting firearms is rooted in racism to restrict minorities from having agency in their communities.

            @JustZ how the fuck are you a lawyer and never understood the history of firearm legislation? Nepotism sounds likely.

            • @Blamemeta
              link
              -2
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Thanks. I wouldn’t have bothered to get links, and definitely not that many links.