The rulings in Maryland and Oregon come amid a shifting legal landscape in the wake of a Supreme Court decision that has imposed new limits on gun regulation.

In the wake of a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision last year that significantly limits what the government can do to restrict guns, states led by Democrats have scrambled to circumvent or test the limits of the ruling. A few have approved new gun restrictions. Oregon even passed a ballot initiative to ban high-capacity ammunition magazines.

But this week, supporters of the new gun measures suffered a pair of setbacks, underscoring the rippling effect of the court’s decision.

On Tuesday, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in Richmond, Va., ruled that a 10-year-old Maryland law related to licensing requirements for handguns was unconstitutional.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 9 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Why do you think law abiding citizens should be gassed, arrested and shot at for exercising their constitutional right to petition the government against grievances? Because Trump sure enjoyed doing those things and he says he's going to do it even more if he gets re-elected. And then there's the Republican love of cruel and unusual punishments. And, of course, there's Mike Johnson and other Republicans denying that there is or should be a separation between church and state.

Seems like maybe the people who are supposed to protect your constitutional right to own a gun don't really care about other constitutional rights.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Point out the part of my comment where I said that

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -6 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Are you going to be voting for the people who claim to be preserving gun rights or are you going to vote for the people who want sensible gun regulations?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 2 years ago (1 child)
  • [–] -5 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    No, I'm not playing that game because it has nothing to do with my point.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Dang I didn't expect to see you avoiding the point, refusing to answer basic questions, and shitting on people for not voting blue no matter who on two separate posts today xD I hope being an ignorant liberal is very fun, and that you learn some time soon that "if you're not with us you're with the terrorists" isn't how the world works

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago*

    Is it true or is it not true that if you don't vote for either Biden or Trump, you are not going to be voting for someone who has any chance of winning?

    Because so far, the only answer I've gotten is 'Republicans deserve to win to teach Democrats a lesson.'

    If you agree with that too, why not just vote for Trump?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    What a lot of whataboutism. I'm against all of that, too, but I can also be against limits on my rights of self defense.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    So do you vote for the people who promise to protect your gun rights at all cost or do you vote for the people who feel there needs to be sensible gun regulations?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I don't vote for the people you're talking about

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    What is the point of voting for anyone else? What do you achieve?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    What's the point of voting for the two choices you hate when there are other choices?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -6 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Because those are the only two choices that have a chance of winning. Now please answer my question. What are you achieving?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Now you see the crux of the issue it seems, on either side someone is attacking the right to something, there is no champion of all rights, everyone wants to control their neighbor.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Seems to me like one is championing ending all of those rights and the other isn't.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Well you'd be wrong, sorry dude.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Yes. Both clearly seek to limit different civil liberties, and supporters of each fight about why what they want to limit isn't actually a civil liberty.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Please show me the Democratic Party's equivalent to Project 2025.

    Or did you not even read it?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Are you denying that the democrat party seeks to limit the right to bear arms? Because by being purposefully obtuse and attempting to deflect (which appears to be your typical MO), you seem to be saying that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Yes, I know, one side seeks to regulate firearms like they were regulated for pretty much all of the 19th century and the other seeks to violate the Constitution in every way possible. No different.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    I guess it's just a question of how much infringement on rights you support. You support "some." I do not.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    You still haven't given me the equivalent plan of Project 2025 that the Democrats have. Can't imagine why...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    I never claimed they had one, I claimed they also are attempting to limit other rights, and this little deflection of yours is adorable but irrelevant, so yes I ignore it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    "Limit" vs. "take away entirely." Interesting.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    "Just get stabbed a few times VS get murdered." Interesting.

    Lol yes clearly one is worse, but both are bad choices, you dingleberry.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments