That’s not the point.
I shouldn’t have to break statutory law to exercise my civil rights. Now if that’s how it’s gotta be, well that’d be unfortunate.
As far as the ignorant lib argument about preventing mass shootings...any weapon will perform well when your victims are defenseless. Against helpless victims a percussion cap muzzle loader and a bayonet would be very effective.
We need 30 round mags to defend ourselves against criminals who are not helpless.
No discussion on the potential need for self defense against multiple assailants? Mass shootings is only one side of the coin. What if you are being attacked by 3 armed men? Assuming of course they obey all other gun laws, they would have up to 33 bullets to your max of 11 (assuming that everyone keeps one round in the chamber plus 10 in the magazine.) You are out numbered, out gunned, and out ammo’d. Not to mention, some people have trouble getting the 9th and 10th round into the magazines.
Strict scrutiny must apply to all civil rights. The dissenting judge is correct. And even under intermediate scrutiny, the need for self defense against multiple assailants counter-balances the state’s need to prevent mass murders.