|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
Divided Circuit Staunchly Backs New Jersey Ammunition Limit
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Upholding a law that limits gun owners from carrying magazines with more than 10 rounds of ammunition, the Third Circuit ruled 2-1 Wednesday that the national rise in mass shootings justifies this reasonable burden on the Second Amendment.
New Jersey adopted the ban here on LCMs, short for large-capacity magazines, this past June, prompting a challenge from two individual gun owners and the Association of New Jersey Rifle and Pistol Clubs. They appealed for a reversal after a federal judge denied them an injunction, but the Philadelphia-based Third Circuit sided with the state as well, noting the logical basis for limiting how much ammunition a firearm can hold. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(12/7/2018)
|
| Red Queen, call your castle.... |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| For, in principle, there is no difference between a law prohibiting the wearing of concealed arms, and a law forbidding the wearing such as are exposed; and if the former be unconstitutional, the latter must be so likewise. But it should not be forgotten, that it is not only a part of the right that is secured by the constitution; it is the right entire and complete, as it existed at the adoption of the constitution; and if any portion of that right be impaired, immaterial how small the part may be, and immaterial the order of time at which it be done, it is equally forbidden by the constitution. [Bliss vs. Commonwealth, 12 Ky. (2 Litt.) 90, at 92, and 93, 13 Am. Dec. 251 (1822) |
|
|
