JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Uh, I'm thinkin' the same?
And there is our future as Oregon creates its crime wave. Would be more interesting if 114 gets through when the crime wave goes big. The panic over not being able to buy a gun would be felt on the Richter scale.

Democrat governors are all running the same play book, just like they are told to do.
 
This is literally the strangest, most convoluted part of her whole plan:

The governor says she doesn't expect criminals to follow the order. But she hopes it is "a resounding message," to everyone else in the community to report gun crime. "The point here is, is that, if everyone did it, and I wasn't legally challenged, you would have fewer risks on the street, and I could safely say, to every New Mexican, particularly those folks living in Albuquerque and Bernalillo County, I believe that you're safer for the next 30 days,

'
Everyone else to report gun crime' ? Is this everyone's new 'weapon' now - to 'report' gun crime?

And at least a PC with balls:
Albuquerque police Chief Harold Medina said he won't enforce it
I think she is saying this, "If you see a person carrying a gun call the police". She wants anyone carrying a gun to be considered a criminal and people to turn in other citizens who carry a gun. If this goes unchecked, it will soon be "turn in anyone you know who own guns".

The left wants to demonize and ostracize any gun owners and anything to do with guns. It's similar to tobacco in a way. It was an all out attack on all front to demonize and erase tobacco from society. That's just a commodity though, not a right, so I don't mean it in that way. I mean just in terms of the method, an all out attack to demonize anyone associated in any way with guns (it's an all out attack that will get worse every year as they try to push the boundaries of what they can get away with).
 
The New Mexico "Public Health Order" banning firearms was issued through their Department of Health, obviously at the behest or influence from their governor. The head of the New Mexico Department of Health is Patrick M. Allen, who was the Oregon Health Authority Director until he resigned, under dubious circumstances, late last year. He was a Marxist/Democrat grifter here, and those of similar positions in Oregon should be considered as of the same ilk.
 
I think some are missing the underlying motivation.

She is not a moron or insane.

She is an anti-gun politician who saw an opportunity.

Her goal is not reducing crime/violence.

Her goal is to set a precedent/example for others to try to restrict our 2A rights.

She admits it will be challenged, and probably expects it won't be upheld in court - but it is an attempt at restrictions, and this is how gun control pols work; try something, if it works (restricts guns), even for a little while - great - if it doesn't work, then try something else.
 
It's hard to comprehend that disarming law abiding citizens outside their homes will somehow make them safer against the criminals who will not do the same.

Even if they did, this would open up anyone who is smaller and weaker (like women, children, elderly) to violence and abuse from those predominately male (50% larger ton average than females)

At least the Governor has her own armed security to keep her safe as will other wealthy and powerful people. So, which party is "For the People" again?

SCOTUS needs to tell Governors (NOT law makers, but the operational part of government that works under the laws made by legislature) that they can't unilaterally strip US Constitutional laws from citizens. Didn't NY state just learn that lesson?
 
It's hard to comprehend that disarming law abiding citizens outside their homes will somehow make them safer against the criminals who will not do the same.
That's because the goal is not the control of criminals or the safety of the citizens. The goal is to disarm the citizens; so that citizens cannot rise against the government, exercising the true intentions of the 2A and following the Declaration of Independence's intentions; it is the Right of the People to change or abolish the Government and to replace with one of their desires.
 
Using health as a reason the commies can do a lot of damage. So quickly we forget how the commies controlled the net as to what can be said about covid or the jab.

They could easily shut this site down as a hazard to kids health.

There is no end to tyranny when commies control the government.

I don't know, do you think if this site would have allowed more political discussions that we may have been able to defeat 114? Getting folks out of the Democrat Party is our only hope now, probably it's too late.
 
This is in the same category as the cute "no guns" stickers on the front of businesses and will be treated equally.

AKA eat a bag of d!cks.
 
I think some are missing the underlying motivation.

She is not a moron or insane.

She is an anti-gun politician who saw an opportunity.

Her goal is not reducing crime/violence.

Her goal is to set a precedent/example for others to try to restrict our 2A rights.

She admits it will be challenged, and probably expects it won't be upheld in court - but it is an attempt at restrictions, and this is how gun control pols work; try something, if it works (restricts guns), even for a little while - great - if it doesn't work, then try something else.
This ^^^

Joe
 
Using health as a reason the commies can do a lot of damage. So quickly we forget how the commies controlled the net as to what can be said about covid or the jab.

They could easily shut this site down as a hazard to kids health.

There is no end to tyranny when commies control the government.

I don't know, do you think if this site would have allowed more political discussions that we may have been able to defeat 114? Getting folks out of the Democrat Party is our only hope now, probably it's too late.
To answer your question. No, not with mail in ballots.
 
I don't know, do you think if this site would have allowed more political discussions that we may have been able to defeat 114? Getting folks out of the Democrat Party is our only hope now, probably it's too late.

To answer your question. No, not with mail in ballots.
Less than 1% difference between yes and no for votes officially, relating to M114. Perhaps the assertion that it wouldn't have made a difference with mail in ballots would have more weight, if it was greater than 1% difference.
 
"this nonsense and outright tyranny will not stop until the tyrants have the fear of God put back into them" Huh....
Like, fear that God can condemn them to Hell?
After death?
Sounds like...
Nothing will change, until politicians start to die.

Joe
You're not wrong, but the solution of violence is like fight club.
 

Upcoming Events

Good News!! The Carson, WA shows are back!!
Carson, WA
Handgun Self Defense Fundamentals
Sweet Home, OR
Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR
Kids Firearm Safety 2 Class
Springfield, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top