A voter-approved Oregon gun control law violates the state constitution, a judge ruled Tuesday, continuing to block it from taking effect and casting fresh doubt over the future of the embattled measure.

The law requires people to undergo a criminal background check and complete a gun safety training course in order to obtain a permit to buy a firearm. It also bans high-capacity magazines.

The plaintiffs in the federal case, which include the Oregon Firearms Federation, have appealed the ruling to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The case could potentially go all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

  • jordanlund@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    23
    ·
    1 year ago

    Not according to the Supreme Court:

    https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/554/570/

    “Private citizens have the right under the Second Amendment to possess an ordinary type of weapon and use it for lawful, historically established situations such as self-defense in a home, even when there is no relationship to a local militia.”

    Here’s the confusion…

    Back when the 2nd Amendment was written, things like “well regulated” and “militia” meant different things than they do now.

    The militia was comprised of all able bodied men who could be called up at any time for defense. They were literally members of the general public.

    Well regulated meant “well armed and equipped”.

    So knowing this, the 2nd Amendment makes perfect sense.

    “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

    Reads as:

    “A well armed and equipped populace, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

    The key phrase here is “right of the people”. All people.