Brickbat: Gunned Down

The Oregon Court of Appeals ruled that Measure 114, a gun control law approved by voters in November 2022, does not violate the state constitution, overturning a lower court's decision that had blocked it. This law aims to reduce gun violence by requiring permits to buy guns and banning magazines holding more than 10 rounds. The appeals court said it fits with Oregon's history of reasonable gun rules. Plaintiffs vowed to appeal the decision to the Oregon Supreme Court. In a separate federal case, a judge also upheld the law, saying it does not violate the Second Amendment. The plaintiffs in that case also plan to appeal.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
That picture, incidentally, is the single most dangerous way you can store a home firearm. Maybe for a gun shop with merchandise on display, but never - ever - for personal ownership.
May as well swap it for a rock you plan to throw at someone.
Some basic tips:
If you've got it in an emergency safe (like the biometric pop-open quick-release kind) - full mag, safety off, one in the pipe. If you don't or your safe is going to take you a minute to open, YMMV on the safety and one in the pipe. Ain't going to tell you how to do that, use your own judgment. Exception might be for the shotgun, where the rack is usually more than enough to have a bad guy peeing their pants just at the mere sound of it. And don't be dumb with your shotgun's loadout. Plan for spread and punching through a door/wall.
And unless you're regularly out doing target practice, make sure you're dumping your mags every few weeks and giving its springs some room to breathe (because perpetually tightly coiled springs do lose their springiness), keeping them as well maintained as your piece. Jacked up spring in the mag = jacked up gun that's going to fail you when you need it.
Do not ever neuter your firearms the way Chaz illustrated here.
As for "banning magazines holding more than 10 rounds" - ugh, if it's going to be that way, then learn speed reloads. You don't need to powerstroke it. Practice practice practice. No dumb gun law can overcome a citizen that knows their firearm inside and out and has put in the hours to train with it.
Without large magazines, how are gang members supposed to do drive-by shootings?
Oh, there's a correct answer to that question - but I'll hold back on it for want of not empowering criminals.
To AT,
I would disagree with almost every word in your post.
The majority of gun owners have more than one gun, the target pistols and barbecue guns can indeed be stored that way.
Your self defense gun should indeed be loaded, ready to go.
Go to “Active self protection” on youtube to see surveillance video of real life gunfights.
Citizens NEVER reload in gunfights, even against multiple opponents.
You will fight with what’s in your gun.
Do a search on gun springs and you will find that all authorities agree that springs fail from tension then relaxation.
Modern springs can be left in tension for decades and will not “lose their springiness”
I'll bet those 'permits' will be easy to get. I'm sure SCOTUS will be involved in this sooner or later.
Um, United States Constitution, you want to weigh in at some point?
The Feds did, on behalf of the Constitution:
Have you noticed that the same side that wants stricter gun control laws also simps for violent criminals?
https://www.newsweek.com/you-can-have-gun-control-you-can-defang-police-you-cant-do-both-opinion-1794484
Why can not states require permits for being able to refuse unreasonable searches of seizures by the police, or to have have an attorney, or to have the right to remain silent, or to be immune from punishment without due process, or to be free from cruel or unusual punishment, or to be entitled to equal protection?
Nobody seems to ask why these ideas are not applied to other civil rights.
We need these laws to end gang violence in the ghetto. Why can't people see that?
Are you being sarcastic?
”…shall not be infringed.
Also, to cut down on green house poison gas, all car's gas tanks will be limited to one gallon.
Unconstitutional on the face of it
Permits are a positive impediment vs the negative impediment of say no gun for a convicted felon
10 Rounds limit...Assumes there are no uses for more than 10 rounds, which is disprovable on the sales data for folks who bought a gun with more than 10 rounds
Onlly a lawyer would be blind to this