- District judge in Oregon upholds measure 114, the most extreme gun control ballot measure
- Measure bans sale, transfer, and import of gun magazines with more than 10 rounds
- Current gun owners with high capacity magazines can keep them but cannot remove them from home
- Lawsuit filed by Oregon Firearms Association argues law violates the constitution
- Gun Owners of America and gun owners foundation file separate suit claiming law violates Oregon constitution
- State level court still needs to hear the case before the law can be enacted
In a recent ruling, a district judge in Oregon upheld measure 114, which has been lauded as the most extreme gun control ballot measure to date. The measure bans the sale, transfer, and import of gun magazines with more than 10 rounds for residents who are not members of the military or law enforcement. However, current gun owners with high capacity magazines are allowed to keep them but are prohibited from removing the weapons from their homes, except for specific purposes such as practicing at a firing range or participating in shooting competitions or hunting.
The district judge, in her ruling, stated that guns with high capacity magazines are not commonly used for self-defense and therefore are not protected under the Second Amendment. She also argued that the Second Amendment allows governments to ensure that only law-abiding and responsible citizens keep and bear arms.
The ruling has sparked backlash from gun rights advocates, with the Oregon Firearms Association filing a lawsuit arguing that the gun control law violates the constitution. The Gun Owners of America and the gun owners foundation have also filed a separate suit claiming that the law violates the Oregon constitution.
Despite the district judge's ruling, the law cannot be enacted until the state level court hears the case, which is scheduled for September. Gun owners and advocates are hopeful that the higher courts will overturn the ruling, considering the lack of legal precedent and foundation for the judge's decision.
This case highlights the ongoing battle between gun control advocates and gun rights proponents. As extreme gun control measures like measure 114 come to a head, the outcome of the appeals process will determine the fate of these laws and set a precedent for future gun control legislation.
Gun rights advocates argue that such measures infringe upon their constitutional rights, while gun control advocates believe that stricter regulations are necessary to ensure public safety. As the case moves forward in the appeals process, it will be crucial to closely monitor the arguments presented by both sides and the potential implications for gun owners and the Second Amendment.
In the end, the fallout from this Oregon gun control ruling may not be as favorable for gun control advocates as they initially thought. The extreme nature of the law and the questionable legal grounds on which it was upheld may give the plaintiffs a strong case for appeal and ultimately lead to the law being overturned. Only time will tell how this legal battle plays out and what it means for the future of gun control in Oregon and beyond.