XPost: ri.politics, alt.politics.usa.constitution.gun-rights, ta   
   k.politics.guns   
   XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, sac.politics   
   From: zinn@reno.us   
      
   PROVIDENCE — As the deadline approaches for gun owners to give up their   
   high-capacity firearm magazines or face legal consequences, a federal   
   judge on Wednesday upheld a newly enacted state law banning magazines that   
   carry more than 10 rounds of ammunition.   
      
   U.S. District Court Chief Judge John J. McConnell Jr. refused to grant a   
   request by a Chepachet gun store and several Rhode Island gun owners for a   
   preliminary injunction blocking the law, which on Sunday will make   
   possession of a large-capacity gun magazine a felony in Rhode Island.   
      
   McConnell found that the plaintiffs Big Bear Hunting and Fishing Supply;   
   three Rhode Island residents — Mary Brimer, James Grundy and Jonathan   
   Hirons; and, a Newport homeowner who lives in Florida, Jeffrey Goyette,   
   had not shown that they would suffer irreparable harm if the law was   
   allowed to take effect, and that allowing its enforcement was in the   
   public's interest.   
      
   Rhode Island politics:RI gun-control lobby buoyed by election wins   
      
   "It is not entirely accurate to say that the victims of mass shootings are   
   chosen randomly. True, they are random in that their identities are   
   usually not known to the shooter, and it appears to matter not to the   
   shooter whether the next one killed is a particular person or the woman   
   standing next to him. But in actuality, victims have not been chosen   
   randomly. They have been chosen because they are attending a synagogue in   
   Pittsburgh or church in Sutherland Spring. Or because they are sitting in   
   a school classroom in Newtown or a high school classroom in Parkland. Or   
   because they were at a concert in Las Vegas or a nightclub in Orlando,"   
   McConnell said. "They were not chosen because of anything they did, but   
   because of what they represented to a particular person with a gun and a   
   lot of ammunition."   
      
   "Consistent with its obligation to protect public safety, but consonant   
   with its fealty to the Constitution, the Rhode Island General Assembly has   
   responded with, among other firearms regulations, the [large capacity   
   magazine] Ban. It is inevitable that Rhode Island will one day be the   
   scene of a mass shooting. The LCM Ban is a small but measured attempt to   
   mitigate the potential loss of life by regulating an instrument associated   
   with mass slaughter," the judge wrote.   
      
   The ruling came as Wednesday marked 10 years since a gunman shot and   
   killed 26 people at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut.   
   Twenty of those killed were children between 6 and 7 years old.   
      
   Sandy Hook to Uvalde: Congress has proposed many gun control laws. Only   
   one has passed.   
      
   Combatting gun violence:RI police find guns — and people who shoot them —   
   with ballistics 'fingerprinting' machine   
      
   The plaintiffs, he said, had not shown that the magazines represented   
   "arms" as seen in the Second Amendment, nor had they presented credible   
   evidence establishing them as a weapon of self-defense.   
      
   The Second Amendment protects the right to people to "keep and bear arms,"   
   and at its core the right to self-defense, McConnell observed.   
      
   The ban was a reasonable and measured approach to restricting large-   
   capacity magazines, which in practice easily convert handguns into semi-   
   automatic weapons capable of rapid fire, he said.   
      
   He accepted the opinion of an expert for the state that throughout history   
   "high capacity firearms ... were understood to be weapons of war or anti-   
   insurrection, not weapons of individual self defense."   
      
   McConnell, likewise, rejected arguments that the law represented an   
   unconstitutional "taking" without just compensation.   
      
   In ruling, the judge cited doctrine establishing that a regulatory   
   restriction that is a valid exercise of police powers does not entitle a   
   property owner to compensation, meaning that the policy is in the public   
   interest, is reasonably designed to accomplish a purpose and is not overly   
   burdensome. The prohibition, he said, was a reasonable response to the   
   public safety interests of the state.   
      
   He relied, in part, on testimony from another state witness, Dr. Megan   
   Ranney, an expert in emergency room medicine with a focus on the public   
   health fallout from gun violence. Ranney produced evidence that the   
   ability to spray bullets results in more injuries, often with multiple   
   wounds, making treatment more complex and victims more numerous.   
      
   McConnell found that data produced by Ranney, though sparse, showed "a   
   connection between employment of LCMs and increased injuries, both in   
   number and seriousness."   
      
   The judge determined that any burden placed on owners to sell, forfeit or   
   modify their magazines under the law was "minor."   
      
   "If this is even a burden at all, it pales in comparison to the   
   substantial nature of the public safety interest at stake," McConnell   
   said.   
      
   State lawmakers hail ruling   
   State leaders on Wednesday praised McConnell's 59-page opinion issued   
   Wednesday afternoon.   
      
   “The legislation placing restrictions on high capacity magazines was   
   carefully developed and thoroughly reviewed, and it was enacted after   
   lengthy public testimony in both the Senate and the House Judiciary   
   Committees," Senate President Dominick J. Ruggerio and House Speaker K.   
   Joseph Shekarchi said in an email. "We firmly believed that the   
   restrictions are necessary, reasonable and in the best interests of public   
   safety, and that they would be upheld in a court of law, just as similar   
   provisions in other states have been upheld. We are grateful to Chief   
   Judge John McConnell for his decision today.”   
      
   Attorney General Peter F. Neronha, who spoke in support of the gun   
   restrictions at the State House, said Judge McConnell made the right call.   
      
   "We are pleased with the Court’s decision and are confident it is the   
   correct ruling. We are still reviewing the decision and expect we will   
   have additional comment very soon," Brian Hodge, spokesman for the   
   attorney general's office, said in a statement.   
      
   Gun control laws in Rhode Island   
   State lawmakers passed three gun-control bills — including one that will   
   prohibit the possession of gun magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of   
   ammunition — last session with the backing of Neronha and gun-safety   
   advocates.   
      
   Days after Gov. Dan McKee signed the measures into law, the gun owners   
   challenged the high-capacity magazine ban in federal court, arguing that   
   it violated their Second Amendment rights and represented an   
   unconstitutional "taking" of their property without just compensation.   
      
   It's a wonderful life: Ohio woman returns to thank two Rhode Island men   
   who saved her life 49 years ago   
      
   What is the punishment for having a high-capacity magazine in RI?   
   Under the law, owners of high-capacity magazines had 180 days to modify   
   the banned components, surrender them to police or transfer them to people   
   in states where such magazines are legal.   
      
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)