This is the proposal for a new Oregon....

Barefootdog

Member
Joined
Apr 3, 2012
Messages
71
Reaction score
46
Location
Willamette Valley, Oregon
Admin Edit-
We don't do general political discussion.
Stick to gun issues ONLY.
If you can't do that, don't comment.

///////////////////////////////////

original post-

The anti gunners are in charge in Salem.....

Ballot measure that needs to be stopped.

http://www.oregonfirearms.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Measure-43.pdf

Amounts to confiscation.

Been in this state since 1971/72. At this point it's unrecognizable from the place I moved to. I don't know if there is a way to stop it. We have two Oregons; the population centers and the rest of the state. May be moving after retirement......
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Register to hide this ad
That’s similar, eerily, to the 2013 Safe Act in NY.
The major difference in NY was the Gov, with the help of some cronies, passed legislation sometime after midnight on the weekend, no ballot initiative.
 
In addition of these proposed laws being a violation if the 2nd, I would love to see them struck down for violating the 14th's equal protection clause. There should be no exceptions allowed for agents of the state. It stinks of George Orwell's "some are more equal than others" condition in Animal Farm.
 
Well, I "liked" you guys, not because of what the post says, but because you are on top of another assault on our fundamental freedoms. I have a close friend who still owns property in Oregon that I will pass this on to.

Best Regards, Les
 
Last edited:
The current group in the state capitol are very good at working quietly and behind the scenes. They don't attract a lot of attention so few people are really watching (or aware) of what is being done. This gun measure is just one issue.

Gathered 88,000 signatures when most in the state never knew it was being proposed. Apparently they stayed primarily in the major population centers like Portland and maybe Eugene or Salem.

Very corrupt and cynical group of ideologs in the state capitol.

Will it pass?.....Very well may....if it gets on the ballot and not challenged in court....largely due to support in the major population center in Portland metro area.
 
Last edited:
The eastern half of Washington should unit with the eastern half of Oregon all the way to the Idaho border and form the 51st state.The left coast has the greater population so fighting them at the ballot box every election day may not be the best course of action.
 
The current group in the state capitol are very good at working quietly and behind the scenes. They don't attract a lot of attention so few people are really watching (or aware) of what is being done. This gun measure is just one issue.

Gathered 88,000 signatures when most in the state never knew it was being proposed. Apparently they stayed primarily in the major population centers like Portland and maybe Eugene or Salem.

Very corrupt and cynical group of ideologs in the state capitol.

Will it pass?.....Very well may....if it gets on the ballot and not challenged in court....largely due to support in the major population.

1) Oregon seems very similar to Illinois. Cook County/Chicago is very left and very in control.

2) Unlike here, at least it is going to the polls. Our Legislators just pass laws like this.

3) As I read it, it isn't confiscation at this point. It is a forced Registration though.

4) The language as I read it, leaves some outs for NOT having to register the rifles.

Lets look at the 'definition of an assault rifle

to be one under that 'law' it first must have the capacity to accept a detachable magazine. Only then, must it also have one of multiple

OR a fixed mag with more than 10 rds.

Then look how Fixed mag is defined. "permanently attached to the rifle, in such a manner, that the device can not be removed without disassembly of the firearm action."

This is just like California's law.

Devices like THIS, satisfy the 'fixed mag' definition, as the upper and lower have to be cracked to engage the mag release. Just has to be only 10 rders or less.

Additionally, this doesn't seem to list 'assault weapons' by model. Thus, rifles like the Mini-14 Ranch, would still be completely legal with 10 rd or less mags.

That said, yes, fight this, fight it into oblivion.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
We don't do general political discussion.
Stick to gun issues ONLY.
If you can't do that, don't comment.
 
No, it's totally different than the NY SAFE Act. See, in the Oregon law, they spelled "muzzle brake" correctly--don't laugh, NYSRPA sued and IIRC, won based on "muzzle breaks" not being a thing--and they remembered to give a blanket pass to law enforcement the first time around.

But yeah--remember all that stuff I said about how Portland, Seattle, Dallas, and Austin are going to ruin your states, the same way NYC ruins NYS? That.

I also wouldn't count on winning any legal challenges.
 
I'm wondering and confused about what happens to my NFA Stamped firearms, IF even some of this happens.

I've already gone through extensive background checks, submitted current photo's, (mug shot's,) and fingerprints.

Anyone living in a state that this has happened have experience to share?

Jim
 
I'm wondering and confused about what happens to my NFA Stamped firearms, IF even some of this happens.

I've already gone through extensive background checks, submitted current photo's, (mug shot's,) and fingerprints.

Anyone living in a state that this has happened have experience to share?

Jim

Section 5 of the proposal suggests that you can register your scary firearms and large capacity magazines with 'the Department' (of what?) on a form that they approve of, and must submit to another background check. Supposedly you are supposed to provide proof of safe storage.

I hope for a day when 'shall not be infringed' actually means something....
 
The current group in the state capitol are very good at working quietly and behind the scenes. They don't attract a lot of attention so few people are really watching (or aware) of what is being done. This gun measure is just one issue.

Gathered 88,000 signatures when most in the state never knew it was being proposed. Apparently they stayed primarily in the major population centers like Portland and maybe Eugene or Salem.

Very corrupt and cynical group of ideologs in the state capitol.

Will it pass?.....Very well may....if it gets on the ballot and not challenged in court....largely due to support in the major population center in Portland metro area.

One thing that would help would be if the pro-gun folks (like you) actually knew what they were talking about and didn’t just spread panicky rumors.

Measure 43 has been FILED for signature gathering, meaning proponents had to submit a whopping 1000 signatures.

Now the AG has been gathering input on the title of the proposed ballot measure, which as far as I know is due to be announced in the next few weeks.

THEN proponents can start trying to collect the 88,000 signatures to try to get it on the November ballot.

HOWEVER, since pro-gun groups are likely to challenge aspects of the measure and the title in court, and signatures can’t be gathered while there is pending litigation, whether or not the measure’s supporters will get enough is at least questionable, maybe even unlikely.

So while there’s work ahead, the sky isn’t falling.
 
Fair enough...I was wrong. Misread two different sources and mistakenly thought this was farther along. Have read additional summaries and now i have an accurate understanding of whats going on...Thanks for pointing it out. I do appreciate that.

That being said pro gun people (like me?) tend to get uncomfortable when targeted by any number of feel good legislative acts or misguided ballot measures.

2A is law of the land....with a clearly defined process on how to change or modify its scope.

Going to the courts/ballot measures to chip away at my ability to exercise A2 rights is not the proper way to go about it. But these are the tactics being used by the mob. Yes it makes me nervous.

Going to the courts/ballot measures do nothing to stop or curb gun violence or deaths. Criminals will have any sort of gun/ magazine they can get their hands on no matter what law says. That defines a criminal. That makes me nervous.

Rather than limiting criminal activity these sorts of ballot measures expand the scope of criminality to capture greater numbers of otherwise law abiding productive non criminal citizens exercising their 2A rights. This makes me nervous.

This is government creating an entirely new class of criminals out of ordinary law abiding citizens whose prior contacts with law enforcement may well be limited to a traffic stop....while doing nothing to curb real criminals going about their daily criminal activities. And that makes me nervous.

But thanks for pointing out my mistake.
 
What a bunch of garbage!!
I do have one question though.... What is the big deal of having a bayonet lug?? How many mass bayonet attacks have we had recently?:rolleyes:

Same as kalif, just a way to ID a weapon they do not like. It has nothing to do with safety or functionality but just a way to say, "oh that is an assault rifle, bayonet lug", or flash suppressor or whatever. It is always a slippery slope.
They started with such poop here & now are going after ALL semiauto guns, regardless of caliber or config. If it fires semiauto, they are afraid & want to ban it. Semiauto pistols are next up in such states.
 
.... going after ALL semiauto ......

Yes. That's how I read the definition too. The definition and the wording of the grip/stock is both comprehensive enough and vague enough to include all long guns I can imagine even bullpup designs.

"Any grip of the weapon, including any a pistol grip, a thumbhole stock or any other stock, the use of which would allow an individual to grip the weapon, resulting in any finger on the trigger hand in addition to the trigger finger being directly below any portion of the action of the weapon when firing;"
 
Back
Top