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.

  • Xhieron@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    11 months ago

    Gonna need some sources on those home invasion stats. I have no horse in this race–it’s not my state–but anybody who says it takes more than ten shots to stop an attacker is going to have to show me something to bulk up their credibility. I’m not going to just take your word on that. Even assuming the stat were technically true, if you can’t stop a home intruder in ten shots, the magazine isn’t the problem.

    Also the car dealership analogy doesn’t hold up, as, in fact, you must show proof that you have passed a legally required test before you will be allowed to test drive a car. It’s not an outrageous requirement.

    Finally, in what universe is a 30 round AR specifically designed for personal defense?

    • GhostCowboy76@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      You obviously don’t understand firearms and this is not the place to educate you on them. I am proud of you for questioning stats on the internet, now go and research them for yourself. Use medical journals as your sources. Or university studies. Wikipedia, Tik Tok and the likes don’t count.

      As far as the car dealership analogy you’ve missed the point. To even begin the conversation you have to have an extra certification. I’m not talking about your driver’s license. And again I am pro gun control.

      As for the AR’s 30 round mag. Research, again through academic sources, the history and purpose of the AR and you’ll understand it’s not a “weapon of mass destruction.” The 30 round capacity is misleading to the firearms capabilities.

      Thank you for your perspective I wish you luck in your educational journey!

      • Xhieron@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        That’s a lot of words to say, “I have no way to back up my claims.” “Go research for yourself” is the last bastion of those whose arguments fail to stand up to scrutiny. You have a lot to say, and so far in this thread the only single piece of evidence you’ve provided is a Youtube video. The AR’s history is that it’s a weapon of war.

        I get the impression you have a lot of personal experience with guns, and you’ve probably been exposed to training in order to increase your comfort level, but “go research for yourself, and your research will obviously make you agree with me” doesn’t change the reality that you haven’t actually given any evidence for the stats you spouted. Save the condescension for your family and neighbors.

        If you want your position to be taken seriously, back it up. Otherwise, everyone will continue to care nothing whatever about what you say.

        That’s all.

        • GhostCowboy76@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          Pot calling the kettle black. Unlike you, I have read the bill. I knew what I voted for when I chose not to support Measure 114. You asked me to hand you supporting evidence for my viewpoints on a silver platter, I don’t do that for keyboard warriors such as yourself. If you’d like to show your interested in a legitimate discussion by showing some sort of fact from your way of looking at it I’m happy to look at it. Your sarcastic claim that I “obviously want you to agree with me” is grotesquely mistaken and again keyboard warrior click bait. Good luck with your journey, you obviously have nothing further to offer.