Judge Blocks The ‘Most Extreme’ Gun Control Law In America

A judge blocked Oregon from enforcing a new law that has been called the “most extreme” gun control measure in the nation by critics.

Oregon Circuit Judge Robert S. Raschio ruled that the new law, which was approved by voters, violated Oregon’s constitution.

The attorney who was representing two gun owners in Harney County in this case, Tony Aiello Jr., commented to Fox News after the decision was handed down:

“This Thanksgiving, we can be thankful for Article I section 27 and its continued protection of our right to bear arms.”

That article in question reads: “The people shall have the right to bear arms for the defence [sic] of themselves, and the State.”

The law, called Measure 114, was passed last year, garnering 50.65% of the total vote. However, only six of Oregon’s 36 total counties ended up supporting the law.

Under the law, anyone who wants to purchase a gun must get a permit first. It also bans sales of any magazine that can hold more than 10 rounds.

Groups such as the legislative arm of the National Rifle Association have said it’s “the nation’s most extreme gun control initiative.”

Even though voters passed the law last year, it hasn’t taken effect yet as it almost immediately faced state- and federal-level legal challenges.

Ellen Rosenblum, the attorney general of Oregon, said the state would be appealing this ruling. It’s expected that it eventually could find its way before Oregon’s Supreme Court.

In a statement, Rosenblum said:

“The Harney County judge’s ruling is wrong. Worse, it needlessly puts Oregonians’ lives at risk.”

A large part of Oregon’s arguments in the case focused around the firearms that were common when Oregon first ratified its state constitution – way back in 1857. The state called history professors to testify on their behalf, saying that guns that could hold many rounds were “vanishingly rare.”

As Bryan DeLay, a professor at the University of California, Berkeley, said:

“Semiautomatic technology and automatic technology are such profound raptures in the history of firearms technology, that I find it very difficult to believe that anybody – even someone very well informed – in the late 1850s could have predicted the emergence of smokeless powder, detachable cartridges, automatic reloading.”

That testimony was countered by Ashley Hlebinsky, who testified on behalf of the plaintiffs. The former curator of a firearm museum, said that many of the early guns were able to fire multiple rounds, with some even having a device that was like a magazine style. And all this existed around when Oregon was first named a state.

After the arguments were completed, Raschio ruled that magazines that had large capacities were available back in the early part of the 1800s, and gunsmiths at the time also were actively trying to work on improving it.

As Aiello said during an interview with Fox News Wednesday:

“The idea that Oregon’s pioneers intended to freeze the firearm technology accessible by Oregonians to antiques is ridiculous on its face. If there is any evidence of such an intention, defendants certainly did not present any of it at trial.”