Federal Judge Decides 10 Rounds Is Enough For Self Defense

Who is this judge to think he can infringe on the lawful rights of the people? How many times must it be said that the 2nd Amendment does not distinguish between "arms." That includes magazines that are part of arms. We went through that with the illegal Clinton gun ban in 1994. It expired on September 13, 2004.and was not reinstated. Infringement is infringement and its against the law.

If they are basing the law on self-defense, they have a legal leg to stand on. If they are basing the law on the Second Amendment, they don't. The Second Amendment is NOT about self-defense, therefore self-defense can be regulated. If the law said something to the effect that you can purchase and posses and carry detachable, loaded or unloaded magazines with capacities greater than ten rounds, however if you employ said magazine in a self-defense situation and it has more than ten rounds in it, you are in violation of the law in the same way as if you use a firearm for self-defense. Even in front of 10 witnesses and video cameras and it was a "good shoot", you are probably still getting arrested, your firearm confiscated, and charged with murder. It is almost like having a car that can do 100 miles per hour. It is not illegal to own or operate. Once you exceed the posted speed limit, you are committing a crime. So you could have your 15 round magazine, but if you loaded it more than ten rounds, you are committing a crime, if you used it in a self-defense situation.

It isn't right, but we need to quit whining about the NRA and bump stocks and we need to get laws written to protect us after we have used any weapon in a self-defense situation.

The right to keep and bear arms should not be messed with, but the laws with which law enforcement or a prosecutor can pervert justice to make a law-abiding citizen into a criminal, simply for protecting themselves or others, need to be rewritten to prevent this. Pulling your gun during a robbery and then yelling "Second Amendment" right before the cops taze you when they show up 20 minutes later will not stand up in court.

We tried to deflect by saying "mental health" every time there was a mass murder and a firearm or firearms were used. Now we have red flag laws. Good job people. If we deflect our infringements of self-defense by citing a federal law that has nothing to do with self-defense, they will keep regulating us through the lack of any law protecting our right to use a firearm or any weapon in self-defense.

The Second Amendment guarantees that the government cannot stop you from obtaining, storing, transporting, carrying, training with, or maintaining an "arm." It is there to deter the government from becoming tyrannical. It is there to use if the government does become tyrannical and the citizens organize to remove the government by force. It is there if the government calls on the citizens to assist law enforcement and/ or the military in their duties in an emergency. It is NOT there to defend your family when someone pulls a gun out at McDonald;'s unfortunately.

We need to get that changed without endangering the Second Amendment as it exists to this day.