Not to mention BOTH Heller and Bruen specifically Stated " All Bearable Interments in Common Use ( Which includes all past and present Military Arms Via Historical Text and Traditions of Militia Service Commands)" except dangerous and unusual, which pretty much dooms the state to a big loss!
Cool story bro. If you read the judges argument, hi cap mags are dangerous and unusual.
Man that AG is not too bright. SCOTUS said specifically that courts are not to use a balancing test that weighs so called public good vs. the right of the individual, but that AG is acting like the Bruen ruling never happened. He is just flat wrong on that.More details on this article
Federal court weighs arguments on Oregon firearms measure • Oregon Capital Chronicle
A federal judge will decide early next week whether to temporarily halt a voter-approved Oregon firearms law from taking effect Dec. 8, as court challenges against it proceed. U.S. District Judge Karin J. Immergut heard arguments Friday about Measure 114, which will limit sales of some...oregoncapitalchronicle.com
That's Not how it went down BRO! She Asked, and framed her question so that STUPID people like Mark Knudson and his band of Merry Woketards could understand the answer as the LAW REQUIRES! Don't kid yourself, She knows full what Bruen commands her to do, I believe she is paving the way to END this nonsense once and for all, and forcing anti 2nd crap out the window! Watch her carefully, Activist or not, this is a sitting fed judge, her words and actions ring out across the nation, a nation watching this very closely, and if she gets it wrong, she eats it big time from SCOTUS, she gets it right, and this ends NOW, at least until the Nutty 9th takes it up, and they now face the exact same Commands from Bruen!
Fwiw I think she is trying to see what are the boundaries post bruen. If you look at all the comments together, especially the straight jacket comment and the police comment, and add that to her testimony from her confirmation hearings, it looks to me that she sees potential for a lot of wiggle room in the Bruen decision. I think she is in alignment with the CA district 9 court in regards to gun control based on what I have seen. Time will tell though. It seems to me all her questions are related to trying to find the boundaries of the bruen decision.
Not correct. Barney Fife had only one bullet for his sidearm.
That could very well be! I don't deny the part of me sitting on the fence with her, COULD prove her an activist! Testing Bruen is a BAD IDEA in my opinion, but others have tested Bruen already, and are loosing Big Time!
It is now crystal clear that the judge is in fact trying to find the boundaries of Bruen. In her new 43 page ruling she has outlined to the anti-gunners paths to try to work around Bruen to pass more anti-gun laws.
That's all good and fine, Until the State Passes whatever the hell they feel like, regardless of the above, which is WHY we have the courts to determine for us, if it's lawful or not, and there in lies the rub, take the Wet Coast lefties who pass all sorts of Unconstitutnal laws all the time, they don't give a Sh!t what the Constitution says, only what YOU can prove in Court! And even when the Courts say NOPE, the Wet Coast States do it anyway because there are no consequences for lawmakers writing and passing bullsh!t Laws! Then we have the Ultra Leftist Activist Courts who believe it's their right and power to Rule From the Bench, so they rarely ever side with the Constitution, instead, they side with the State who made those bullsh!t Laws!
Here is my argument! Do you own a fire extinguisher? Does your fire extinguisher hold more then half a pound of suppressant? If it can hold 3/4 pound, would you be willing to give up that 1/4 pound for safety, because some jackarse said no one needs a high capacity fire extinguisher!!! Phuck Me, that what we're dealing with here and these loony-tunes!!!
