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

[CAJUNLAWYER]

Laws like this really start to make revolvers look like the way to go.

 

[WR Moore]

As I was about to drift off to sleep, I realized it wouldn't be hard to create a fixture that would move the grip & trigger of the AR pattern rifle to the rear of the action. You'd end up with a trigger blocking safety and it'd really screw with the folks who have to have their nose on the rear sight, but I think it'd be doable.

I think the bullpup would be exempt.

What we really need is an outstanding PR campaign.

 

[steelslaver]

Most rifles except those like a model 94 Winchester have a "pistol grip" and the trigger is below the action. Take a Ruger model 77, for example, the little cap, with the Ruger emblem, is on the butt of the "pistol grip" and the trigger of course is below the action DUH

 

[les.b]

^^^^^^ThTs just what I was thinking. When reading anti gun legislative proposals, it hard to tell whether we're dealing with extreme ignorance, or cunning malice. Or maybe a mixture of both.

Best Regards, Les

 

[g8rb8]

^^^^^^ThTs just what I was thinking. When reading anti gun legislative proposals, it hard to tell whether we're dealing with extreme ignorance, or cunning malice. Or maybe a mixture of both.

Best Regards, Les

Les,
I think the answer is cunning malice. I think legislators learned from the 1994 Federal Assault Weapons Ban and use language that eliminates prior workarounds like thumb hole stocks and have tried to use language that is both vague enough and specific enough that, as I read it, eliminates any semi-auto rifle. For example at least one poster has opined bull pup rifles would be spared but as I interpret the law and interpret the action of a bull pup rifle the bull pup rifle would still be banned based upon the action irregardless of whether or not it has a detachable magazine and irregardless of magazine capacity.

Looking again at the proposal as written (quoted below):
1. "Any grip". There are no exceptions. This is all inclusive.
2. "Any finger on the trigger hand ...... being directly below any portion of the action." This wording eliminates all conventional long guns. I can rationalize that the trigger of a bull pup, although not directly below the action as I define the action (i.e. receiver), is connected via a mechanism under the action to the action and thus part of the action and by the wording of this proposal would therefor be "below any portion of the action" and thus banned under this wording.

Based upon the wording of the proposal with the one key work of "under" an optimist would counter that you could design a gun with the trigger mechanism above the receiver or offset from the receiver but I cannot imagine that going over very well or being very ergonomic. And the blindly optimist would counter you could just shoot your weapon upside down.

From the proposal: "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;"

 

[GaryS]

The Oregon Supreme Court has granted the NRA petition to block the initiative from going forward. The ballot title was inadequate and misleading.

The are at this this link.

 

[dirty & hairy]

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.

I agree 100%, they are a sneaky bunch. In the Rogue Valley our population center is Medford, which is pretty much in line with Eugene and the rest.

To me, the State of Jefferson never looked better. Too bad it will never happen. At least I have my revolvers.

 

[joeintexas]

Laws like this really start to make revolvers look like the way to go.

For today at least. Somehow I don't think those folks are quite done yet.

 

[Absalom]

Final word until 2020:

As of last week, the measure was withdrawn. With additional requirements to change the title imposed by the Oregon Supreme Court, there was no more time to actually gather signatures by the July 6 deadline.

 

[fredj338]

As I was about to drift off to sleep, I realized it wouldn't be hard to create a fixture that would move the grip & trigger of the AR pattern rifle to the rear of the action. You'd end up with a trigger blocking safety and it'd really screw with the folks who have to have their nose on the rear sight, but I think it'd be doable.

I think the bullpup would be exempt.
What we really need is an outstanding PR campaign.

No they would just put a minimum over all length, too concealable.

 

[dacoontz]

Thanks for the info fellow Oregonians. I am moving to Medford in 5 days so I'll be there to join the battle and see if we can't tip the scales somewhat.

Dirty & hairy mentioned that Medford is in line with Eugene, but my very limited experience with people there don't seem to be anti-gun at all. Many seem to be very much for the 2nd amendment. Now Ashland is a different story. Also, I get the impression that local sheriffs in Southern Oregon have little to no interest in chasing after law abiding gun owners that may be affected by the previously discussed proposed legislation.

 

[Barefootdog]

Very happy this got knocked down by the court....But they will be back and next time have their I's dotted and T's crossed.

i guess I over reacted when I started this thread...Good new is I learned more about how these things work...Appreciate all the input.

 

[Absalom]

Thanks for the info fellow Oregonians. I am moving to Medford in 5 days so I'll be there to join the battle and see if we can't tip the scales somewhat.

Dirty & hairy mentioned that Medford is in line with Eugene, but my very limited experience with people there don't seem to be anti-gun at all. Many seem to be very much for the 2nd amendment. Now Ashland is a different story. Also, I get the impression that local sheriffs in Southern Oregon have little to no interest in chasing after law abiding gun owners that may be affected by the previously discussed proposed legislation.

Oregon is very quirky. It has this very liberal reputation, and some things, like the FFL requirement for all transfers, are a hassle.

But on the other hand, we’ve always had open carry, and we became shall-issue on CCWs in 1989, more than 10 years before some of those supposedly gun-friendly Southern states.

In Southern Oregon especially, you’ll find quite a few gun rights defenders that are pot-smoking hippie libertarians who don’t have much else in common with standard pro-gun conservatives