Oregon's new gun law found to be legal by Fed judge

The "training" requirement is simply another tax. The state does not care about firearms safety or competence. It is simply another scheme to increase the cost of firearms ownership. It is nice that some are able to find some way to justify this overreach.
 
I agree with getting some training before you carry a gun, however, look at what NJ has done with this requirement. The training should be voluntary simple because the state can make it an unattainable requirement and in essence block you 2A rights.
 
If I recall, Washington doesn't have a State Tax. However, they are only one step behind Oregon on their gun laws. Also, I do not believe that it is a good idea to turn tail and run every time some "progressive" law gets passed. Keep that up and soon there will be nowhere to run to.

There are a lot of States with pro-gun laws. If pro-2A people would move from the States that are effectively banning firearms and passing laws that delay and limit ownership to the pro-2A States we can prevent the libs in the big cities from passing anti-gun laws.

But the harsh reality is voter apathy by gun owners is causing these problems.
 
Again taking a page out of NY play book with regards to training. They are making self defense unaffordable for those that need it most. Low income families living in crime ridden communities. It's disgusting!!!!!
 
The existence of purchase permits is infuriating. If one goes to the trouble of getting a standard carry permit, or goes through a NICS check each time they purchase a firearm, then anything more is completely superfluous.
 
There are a lot of States with pro-gun laws. If pro-2A people would move from the States that are effectively banning firearms and passing laws that delay and limit ownership to the pro-2A States we can prevent the libs in the big cities from passing anti-gun laws.

But the harsh reality is voter apathy by gun owners is causing these problems.

History is full of examples of the strong staying to fight, while the cowards cut and run. Dont forget to take a moment to thank Heller and Bruen, just two examples of people that did not follow your advice.
 
I live in Canada. Last year the federal government banned the import and transfer of handguns. The handguns I have now are the only handguns I will ever have. When I die, I can't even leave my handguns to my children, the government will confiscate them. The Government of Canada will not stop until legal gun ownership is abolished.
 
Hard to get in a Second Amendment discussion with somebody in another country . . .

I live in Canada. Last year the federal government banned the import and transfer of handguns. The handguns I have now are the only handguns I will ever have. When I die, I can't even leave my handguns to my children, the government will confiscate them. The Government of Canada will not stop until legal gun ownership is abolished.
 
Oregon's new gun law

This Oregon measure ( 114) is still on hold due to a Harney County Oregon Judge's TRO (temporary restraining order) The judge is suppose to hold a hearing in September on his restraining order.

The Federal judge's upholding of this measure will be appealed
to the 9TH circuit.
 
Last edited:
4 boxes diner did a great break-down eviceration of the ruling. [ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PG3kscBnBCs[/ame]

1. She contradicts herself between footnote 2 and page 59/60
2. In the preliminary accepted facts, everyone agrees there are millions and millions of "large capacity magazines" in use, thus immediately causing Oregon to lose their case, as only dangerous AND UNUSUAL "firearms" can be banned, and there is nothing unusual about tens of millions of magazines.
3. She says magazines aren't considered "arms" thus aren't protected. I guess she never read Heller.

She is a former DOJ/ATF prosecutor in the "Project Safe Neighborhoods" program, and should have recused herself. VERY biased.

Here is her ruling, and there has already been an appeal filed. https://assets.nationbuilder.com/fi...377574/OFF_v_Kotek_252_Opinion.pdf?1689377574
 
Re time to get the NICS approved, I purchased a handgun on two occasions in June here in Oregon and was approved in minutes.

I think the permit to acquire, for every single handgun purchase, is pointless. (Hawaii does that, and in their case getting the permit to acquire takes two weeks after application.) For gun owners it is harassment. For anti gunners, it will not do anything to make society safer.

On the other hand, I do think proof of a basic understanding of gun safety is a reasonable requirement for gun ownership. Something like the basic NRA gun safety course. And I think it ought to be offered free to first time gun purchasers. Pay for it with tax money. Offer it in schools, community centers, churches and workplaces. Wherever people gather. Once done, it's done.

In a society with as many guns as we have, it would be useful for non gun owners to understand gun safety so as to know how to behave if they come across an unattended gun, or one that needs temporary safekeeping. (Say a CCW person is injured, incapacitated, or loses his gun.)

When I started buying guns again about twenty years ago, after a long hiatus, we were in Hawaii. Hawaii required a basic gun safety course as the first step. My wife, who has no interest in guns whatsoever, took the course with me as she wanted to know how to be safe around them if they were going to be in the house.
 
Re time to get the NICS approved, I purchased a handgun on two occasions in June here in Oregon and was approved in minutes.

I think the permit to acquire, for every single handgun purchase, is pointless. (Hawaii does that, and in their case getting the permit to acquire takes two weeks after application.) For gun owners it is harassment. For anti gunners, it will not do anything to make society safer.

On the other hand, I do think proof of a basic understanding of gun safety is a reasonable requirement for gun ownership. Something like the basic NRA gun safety course. And I think it ought to be offered free to first time gun purchasers. Pay for it with tax money. Offer it in schools, community centers, churches and workplaces. Wherever people gather. Once done, it's done.

In a society with as many guns as we have, it would be useful for non gun owners to understand gun safety so as to know how to behave if they come across an unattended gun, or one that needs temporary safekeeping. (Say a CCW person is injured, incapacitated, or loses his gun.)

When I started buying guns again about twenty years ago, after a long hiatus, we were in Hawaii. Hawaii required a basic gun safety course as the first step. My wife, who has no interest in guns whatsoever, took the course with me as she wanted to know how to be safe around them if they were going to be in the house.

I agree. Furthermore, if certain "talking heads" and politicians are advocates of gun safety (as many claim to be), then they should support and encourage firearm safety training. Not a mandate but encouragement in the form of government (fed and state) tax credits for classes, just for starters. There are ways to achieve a basic firearms education without making it mandatory……. that is if they are truly interested…………
 
I think the permit to acquire, for every single handgun purchase, is pointless.

I finally was able to actually find and read the current language of this bill. While we will technically be required to have a permit to purchase every firearm, one successfully approved permit would be valid for 5 years. Multiple firearms can be purchased with this permit. The permit "shall not cost more than $65.00."

Unfortunately it seems that this whole measure is still being figured out and finalized. Who will be authorized/certified to do the instruction part is cloudy as well is the fee. Most of us that have a valid Concealed Carry Permit already had to prove their worthiness.

I won't get into the absurdity of the magazine issue. Without sales receipts how is "proof of prior possession date" for over 10 rnd mags established?

This will be a long drawn out battle. Unfortunately even though Measure 114 hasn't become law yet it's obvious made an impact. When searching some sites on line a banner shows up stating "No sales to Oregon." Some offerings are not even affected by this Measure but sellers will not deal with anyone here.

Jim
 
Most of NY, if not all, have purchase permits. Some counties issue them ahead of time, lucky for those living there, so you can take it with you and get your gun on the spot. But, most counties issue them after you purchased a gun but before you could pick it up. You have to take the BOS to your county clerk, file an amendment, and wait for a "coupon".

The "issuing authority", most times a County judge, had to sign off on it, and send it back to the clerk who then called you to come get it. Some counties are able to accomplish this Herculean feat in hours/days, others take weeks.

I passed on some good deals when hours away from home because it required another trip to the gun store to complete the deal.

Now they have a permit system for semi auto long guns?

Stupid, onerous system, if you already have a handgun permit and had you life scrutinized from the day you were born.
 
I would not feel helpless with an 8+1 .45 1911, or a 7 or 8 round, .357 magnum revolver.

I would not feel helpless with either of those. Neither should people feel scared because I have a Glock with 17 rounds. The difference being, me carrying over 10 rounds is not infringing on others rights. Them telling me how many rounds I can carry in a gun is infringing on my rights.
 
"....Now they (NY) have a permit system for semi auto long guns?...."

They have 'kind 'of ' a permit system for the semi auto Rifles.
The new law does not effect semiauto shotguns as of right now.

To purchase a semi auto rifle in NY, you are required to have a NYS P/P WITH the permit with a simple 'Semi Auto Rifle' amendment.
That amendment is a simple sticker and sometimes a stamp placed on the P/P you already have. Done by the County Clerk or other Issuing Auth where you got your P/P.

With that cryptic amendment listed on your P/P, you are good to purchase a semiauto rifle in NYS.
Remembering that ALL gun transactions must go thru an FFL in NYS, the acquisition (if legal) will come from/thru and FFL Dealer even if they play the part in a 3rd party transfer.

That's the easy part of the S/A amendment for existing P/P holders. Just go and get your P/P amended.

If you are just now wanting to get a NYS P/P, or you just want to buy a S/A rifle and don't care about having a Pistol,,well you need to get a P/P anyway so it can be amended so you can then purchase that S/A rifle.

Purchasing a S/A rifle is NOT registered in NY and is not listed on your NYS P/P. It's just the same 4473/NICS check and out the door as before.
Some local laws may be stricter of course especially downstate.

Any S/A rifle owned before the new regs is legal. No proof of prior dated ownership required. But if you sell/transfer it, of course it has to go thru an FFL. So the next purchaser must have the S/A rifle amendment on a P/P for purchase,,,or that's the idea.

A real crime stopper!

Getting a P/P since the new rules have been put in place require the 18hr class room plus 2 hrs range time Safety Course.
If you can find a qualified person to give the coarse, going prices seem to fall betw $250 and $400 . More in some regions. Less if you have a 'friend' I suspect.
 
Back
Top