He said Siegel’s testimony didn’t appear to be scientific under Oregon’s evidence laws and said that unless Siegel’s research could demonstrate decisively that high capacity magazine bans resulted in fewer gun deaths, he would not consider it when making his ruling.
What? This bit sounds like abuse of arbitrary judicial power.
What? This bit sounds like abuse of arbitrary judicial power.
Yeah, its not the reason I would give. Theres a standard for gun control, in 'common use."
And standard capacity mags (here theyre called high capacity) are in common use.
I forget the supreme court case that established it but I bet I could find it if asked.
But then again, the capacity of the mag has not been shown to correlate with gun deaths. Its valid reasoning, factually speaking.
I would use miller as the caselaw. Does a high capacity magazine serve a military purpose? Yes it does.
I?
I think your comment got messed up.
Meh, wrong formula, right answer