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

[BSA1]

Government mandated firearm safety program is discriminatory to minorities, single parent raising child(ern), low income people and the handicapped. It puts a unreasonable burden on them that other groups of people are not affected as much by. Just as the Poll Tax was it is intended to keep certain groups of people from exercising their right of security in their homes.

For this reason alone the law should be struck down.

 

[WCCPHD]

The general principals of the law in question were litigated many years ago.

A permit to exercise a Constitutionally protected right is the same as a poll tax.

Requiring training (whether good or bad, necessary or not) is basically a literacy test.

Both had nothing to do with taxes or literacy. They were laws used to suppress a Constitutional right. They were both held to be, what they are, illegal.

In 1803 the United States Supreme Court held that "a law repugnant to the Constitution is void, and courts, as well as other departments, are bound by that instrument."

Should be easy for a moderately literate judge to rule on the Constitutionality of the laws.

 

[1sailor]

With regards to firearms training. The days when most Americans grew up around guns is past. Having worked at a sporting goods counter I can say that there were times I was shocked by the ignorance some new firearms owners had regarding use and safety. I have even encountered new concealed permit carriers that did not even know for sure what ammo their pistol used. One of our employees was even asked by a customer if he could show them how to load it. I don't think it's necessary to have safety classes but at least a free online course showing basic functionality and safety. Pass the test at the end, print it out, and you're good to go. We can't have people running around accidentally shooting each other or displaying insane antics on tv (remember all the idiots on the news just a couple of years ago). That hurts us as much as anything else. In a lot of states it has been a requirement for years that under the age of 18 you needed to take a course to get a hunting license and it's never been a problem.

 

[Beemerguy53]

Beginning now or soon, Oregon's new bill 114 goes into effect. Among other things you must buy a permit to purchase a firearm. Before buying the permit you must complete a firearms course. Magazines with a capacity of more than ten rounds are banned. Existing hi-cap mags are grandfathered in but NOT LEGAL for open or concealed carry. I'm not familiar enough with any of the other provisions to comment on them. I'm glad I didn't just drop a bundle on a new hi-cap concealed carry but all those who own them can now only carry it with a 10 round mag that CANNOT be altered to carry more than the ten. Let me make this clear though. Oregon did not vote for this. Portland did, and they have well over 50% of the votes in this state.

It sounds like Oregon modelled their new law on Maryland's laws...which have done nothing to stop the bloodshed in Baltimore City and the counties bordering Washington, D.C., where our state's criminal underclass resides. (The only thing different is that here, you can carry your grandfathered "hi-cap" mags in your legal concealed-carry pistol.)

The whole licensing thing makes me shake my head. How can it be legal to license a constitutional right, especially in light of the Heller decision? Back in the 1960s, federal courts struck down poll taxes and literacy tests for voting, rightly concluding that they were designed to inhibit the exercise of a constitutional right.

Good luck to y'all out there...

 

[biku324]

With regards to firearms training. The days when most Americans grew up around guns is past. Having worked at a sporting goods counter I can say that there were times I was shocked by the ignorance some new firearms owners had regarding use and safety. I have even encountered new concealed permit carriers that did not even know for sure what ammo their pistol used. One of our employees was even asked by a customer if he could show them how to load it. I don't think it's necessary to have safety classes but at least a free online course showing basic functionality and safety. Pass the test at the end, print it out, and you're good to go. We can't have people running around accidentally shooting each other or displaying insane antics on tv (remember all the idiots on the news just a couple of years ago). That hurts us as much as anything else. In a lot of states it has been a requirement for years that under the age of 18 you needed to take a course to get a hunting license and it's never been a problem.

The stuff people say at current CCL classes doesn't comfort me.

 

[biku324]

Government mandated firearm safety program is discriminatory to minorities, single parent raising child(ern), low income people and the handicapped. It puts a unreasonable burden on them that other groups of people are not affected as much by. Just as the Poll Tax was it is intended to keep certain groups of people from exercising their right of security in their homes.

For this reason alone the law should be struck down.

So state-mandated hunter safety training is unconstitutional?

 

[BSA1]

So state-mandated hunter safety training is unconstitutional?

A Hunter Safety Course does not infringe on the Right to own firearms suitable for hunting. I can own all of the shotguns, rifles and handguns I want (within the limits imposed by State Law if any) without completing a Hunter Safety Course.

Nor am I prohibited from hunting at least in some States. Hunter Safety Permits usually are required for hunting on public land. I may not need one to hunt on a private game preserve.

The money from Hunter Safety Permits is used to manage the game population and protect the hunting reserves so people can continue to hunt in the future.

 

[Racer X]

A Hunter Safety Course does not infringe on the Right to own firearms suitable for hunting. I can own all of the shotguns, rifles and handguns I want (within the limits imposed by State Law if any) without completing a Hunter Safety Course.

Nor am I prohibited from hunting at least in some States. Hunter Safety Permits usually are required for hunting on public land. I may not need one to hunt on a private game preserve.

The money from Hunter Safety Permits is used to manage the game population and protect the hunting reserves so people can continue to hunt in the future.

and at least some states grandfather hunters born before a certain date too. I know the sportsmans club I am a member at gives several hunter safety courses a year for free, except materials at cost. just being a decent member of the community.

 

[WCCPHD]

There is no Constitutional right to hunt.

 

[stansdds]

There is no Constitutional right to hunt.

This is true, only a constitutional right to keep (own) and bear (carry) firearms. It it fascinating how some people make the claim that the 2A guarantees the right to hunting and owning hunting firearms. The 2A does not mention hunting and yes, I read it several times and it is not an amendment for hunters only.

 

[dockmurgw]

This is true, only a constitutional right to keep (own) and bear (carry) firearms. It it fascinating how some people make the claim that the 2A guarantees the right to hunting and owning hunting firearms. The 2A does not mention hunting and yes, I read it several times and it is not an amendment for hunters only.

More forum lore, I'm fascinated in how many people perpetuate the myth that hunters think the 2A protects hunting. Nobody thinks that the 2A protects hunting, but contrary to your comment...a gun is a gun no matter the purpose, so it does protect the hunter's gun. A dbl barrel 20 gauge receives the same protection as the latest S&W plastic junk. This 2A and hunting thing is just noise from the crowd that loathes FUDS because they think they are not 2A purists. They think that someone fighting gun control regs because it would impact their hunting tools is somehow inferior to someone that is focused on magazine restrictions. But for what its worth, some states do protect hunting in their STATE constitutions.

 

[dockmurgw]

There is no Constitutional right to hunt.

Wrong...you didnt say FEDERAL Constitutional right. Some states protect hunting in their STATE constitutions. But besides that, nobody thinks the 2A protects hunting, but it absolutely does protect the gun they use, assuming they are using a gun.

 

[WCCPHD]

My comment about hunting and the Constitution was made to mock the fallacy of the anti's talking about how many rounds it takes to kill a deer.

It amazes me how many Constitutional rights have been extrapolated from the original writings of the Constitution and how the same group that does this will deny what is written in black and white.

 

[IrishFritz]

What bothers me most about our current situation is the drift towards irrelevancy of our constitutional rights and the lack of redress within the courts. It does not bode well.

 

[crstrode]

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.

The vast majority of those that stay are not fighting, nor are they even capable of putting up a struggle. They similarly are not coward or heroes - they are inattentively oblivious to the destruction they are enabling.

 

[venomballistics]

I'm not opposed in any way to people training with their firearms, but I am against the govt mandating it. And I dont get the whole 10rd cap. That's just such a random number. Are we safer when we can only carry 10rds? I think not. I think they are just passing laws that they think they can slide under the radar with, for as long as it takes to reach their ultimate goal of total disarmament of the people.

most laws tend to shift the advantage to those who do not follow it. Training has the potential to be the exception. But only the potential. It is sure to be screwed up from the first day of implementation.

 

[stansdds]

The vast majority of those that stay are not fighting, nor are they even capable of putting up a struggle. They similarly are not coward or heroes - they are inattentively oblivious to the destruction they are enabling.

In other words, they are sheeple.

 

[Alk8944]

Don't give up hope yet, Oregon is within the jurisdiction of the 9th Circuit Court, the most over-turned court in the United States. Many, if not all, 2nd Amendment cases decided unfavorably by the 9th Circuit have been over-turned by SCOTUS. This sort of thing is one reason that court appointments should not be political!

 

[CH4]

The vast majority of those that stay are not fighting, nor are they even capable of putting up a struggle. They similarly are not coward or heroes - they are inattentively oblivious to the destruction they are enabling.

More succinctly: they're apathetic.

 

[biku324]

Or it's just not something they care about.