Oregon Assault Weapon, Handgun, & Magazine Ban - Initiative 43

[Maximum1]

They stated they are not using paid signature gatherers in the first application. did they lie or change it ?

As I said above, they are NOT using paid signature gatherers given the fact they have legions of volunteers.

 

[Maximum1]

That is cool. Did not Connecticut go ahead and do the AR 15 Registration?

I don't know about Connecticut but California passed a law that required all so-called assault weapons to be registered.

Bureau of Firearms

Frequently Asked Questions

 

[Wombat of Doom]

OSP is currently keeping tabs On everything you buy sell or trade for a 5 or 6 year period.

Illegally yes

 

[Maximum1]

Actually it can as federal law mandates the NFA for example, and the act you quoted clearly forbids state registries directly in the wording.

Sorry but you don't know what you are talking about. Many state have gun registries. California, New York. Illinois, and a handful of others. They've had them for years.

 

[Wombat of Doom]

Sorry but you don't know what you are talking about. Many state have gun registries. California, New York. Illinois, and a handful of others. They've had them for years.

incorrect see quoted law earlier.

 

[etrain16]

And given the anti-gun climate and the motivation of the liberals in this state unless we are able to delay the process they will get it on the ballot and reality is they will get a majority of the vote to pass their ban. That's not emotion its based on today's Oregon political reality.

Your statement implies you have a plan to delay the process, yet you still haven't shared that plan with us. How can people act if they don't know what's supposed to be done? Seriously - if you know more about this than others here, then please, enlighten us as to the plan of action to stop them.

 

[etrain16]

General observation:

I find it interesting that now that this ballot initiative is underway, a number of new names have shown up on this forum, folks that haven't really taken the time to engage this forum in conversation previously, and come here to tell us we're either doing it wrong, we're not doing enough, we're all just fine with losing our rights, etc., etc.

I seriously don't get this. If you don't know us, and we don't know you, what makes you think we're going to be influenced to act in any way based on some random comments and insults from people we don't know? And honestly, what gives any of you making these statements the idea that folks on this forum are doing nothing to fight it?

I just don't get where folks get off jumping into a group they don't know and tossing around insults and accusations. It certainly isn't going to motivate anyone to action. And really, how do we know you're doing everything you can? How do we know you're not just blowing smoke up our backsides? How do we know you're not from the opposition just here to try and stir up dissent among gun owners? Honest questions that need to be answered.

 

[etrain16]

I would encourage everyone here to read this article as well as to share it with everyone you can. It came out last October and is an opinion piece written by an anti - a former statistician at FiveThirtyEight - a leftist, anti-gun site. It is her opinion that gun control isn't the solution based on what's really going on. She is up front about her anti-gun bias, but also is honest enough in analyzing the data to recognize that gun control isn't the answer. Well worth the read if you haven't already done so.

Opinion | I used to think gun control was the answer. My research told me otherwise.

Be sure to share this with anyone that will listen.

 

[3MTA3]

Actually it can as federal law mandates the NFA for example, and the act you quoted clearly forbids state registries directly in the wording.

And OSP was caught twice keeping an illegal registry with no punishment and only a promise to "not be bad again". If you own anything on the ban list that that used a BGC it's in a database somewhere and they will know where to start looking if there isn't a correlating registration post ban. Lord, would I love to get a true Republican elected to Governor to get that cleaned up.

My semi auto's will be safely out of state when the Brown Shirts knock down my door at 3AM. I'll still have my KSG and my actual machine gun along with a stack of 10 round mags that they can't do jack bubblegum about. THAT will bring a damn smile to my face as well as my lawyers'.

 

[etrain16]

And OSP was caught twice keeping an illegal registry with no punishment and only a promise to "not be bad again". If you own anything on the ban list that that used a BGC it's in a database somewhere and they will know where to start looking if there isn't a correlating registration post ban. Lord, would I love to get a true Republican elected to Governor to get that cleaned up.

My semi auto's will be safely out of state when the Brown Shirts knock down my door at 3AM. I'll still have my KSG and my actual machine gun along with a stack of 10 round mags that they can't do jack bubblegum about. THAT will bring a damn smile to my face as well as my lawyers'.

Same here. The last thing I will ever do is forcibly surrender, destroy, deactivate or sell anything I own based on the threat of action by the government of Oregon. I am already setting up a trust that will make it very easy to move my guns out of state, though I'm not even sure I'll do that unless I see evidence that they're actually enforcing the law - which I don't think they will, outside of say, Portland. And all that depend on whether or not this law, if passed, is even lawful/constitutional - I strongly suspect it's not and fully expect it to be challenged in court before it goes into effect.

 

[eklarsen]

Same here. The last thing I will ever do is forcibly surrender, destroy, deactivate or sell anything I own based on the threat of action by the government of Oregon. I am already setting up a trust that will make it very easy to move my guns out of state, though I'm not even sure I'll do that unless I see evidence that they're actually enforcing the law - which I don't think they will, outside of say, Portland. And all that depend on whether or not this law, if passed, is even lawful/constitutional - I strongly suspect it's not and fully expect it to be challenged in court before it goes into effect.

I would suggest not posting about that in a public forum.

 

[eklarsen]

Maximum1 will not read but here are the states that had a registry before the FOPA of 1986 and therefore can legally still require you to register. Note: Oregon nor Washington is listed there, they may be trying to reclassify them as "Assault Weapon" and therefore not a firearm but good luck with that.

States that Require Registration of Pre-Ban "Assault Weapons" and/or 50 Caliber Rifles

1. California
2. Connecticut
3. Hawaii
4. Maryland
5. New Jersey
6. New York

 

[nammac]

Dear U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions - please open an investigation into the goings on of the Oregon Legislature, Oregon Attorney General and Oregon Governor, as they each and every day, blatantly violate federal law with regards to a firearms registration database, which is managed by the OSP under the guise of NICS background checks.

Further investigation into their campaign funding, which George Soros and Michael Bloomberg are not only significant contributors, but receive significant benefit, in the form of reduced citizens civil rights and thus more government control. Several measure have been ramrodded through the legislature regardless of public testimony, most notable SB941 in the 2015 legislative session. A gift to Michael Bloomberg from Governor Kate Brown for his $250K contribution to her campaign...

And of course you already know that illegal immigrants are put ahead of Oregonians in all aspects. And are kept hidden from ICE agents, because we all know these federal felons are the greatest contributors to our state...

 

[3MTA3]

... And all that depend on whether or not this law, if passed, is even lawful/constitutional - I strongly suspect it's not and fully expect it to be challenged in court before it goes into effect.

I expect the law, if passed, to be challenged and I will monetarily support the effort. Hopefully there will at least be a stay placed on it while the legality is being determined.

One question I have is that if a portion of a law is deemed unconstitutional, then is the entire law scrapped or just that portion?

 

[DuneHopper]

I expect the law, if passed, to be challenged and I will monetarily support the effort. Hopefully there will at least be a stay placed on it while the legality is being determined.

One question I have is that if a portion of a law is deemed unconstitutional, then is the entire law scrapped or just that portion?

To avoid all this, thats what the Attorney Generals job is and based on Oregon's Constitution this should be deemed unconstitutional, and not even get a second to be on the ballot, but we all know they won't do their jobs.

 

[3MTA3]

To avoid all this, thats what the Attorney Generals job is and based on Oregon's Constitution this should be deemed unconstitutional, and not even get a second to be on the ballot, but we all know they won't do their jobs.

Certainly not THIS Attorney General, but I bet if the initiative was about removing firearm restrictions or overturning Fuhrer Brown's executive orders they would work around the clock to find a way to invalidate it

 

[brenty]

I already knew they are not using paid signature collectors given the fact I read their initiative application.

I also read the entire oregon ballot intiative procedures and guidelines and spoke several times with the Oregon Elections Division Administer for State Initiatives. With all due respect I am confident I know more about the process and procedures than you. A lot more. How do you think I was able to list the Initiative qualification steps and timeline? Duh.

As far your comment, "doomed to fail is based emotions and not reality". It's not emotion, it's based on data. I attended a few of their organizing meetings, strategy sessions and their intiative kick off meeting last Thursday to understand what they are up to, their organization, and their ability to get the required signatures.

Not only are they well organized and well funded they have support from many anti-gun organizations. They have a deployment plan that will put 1000+ signature volunteers on the ground once the Election Division authorizes their signature gathering. Like I said, they gathered 3400+ signatures in just two days with only 50 volunteers just think how many signatures they will gather with a 1000 volunteers statewide, hint they plan to mobilize a vast army of college students. You got to admire their strategy to keep the face of young people out if front.

And given the anti-gun climate and the motivation of the liberals in this state unless we are able to delay the process they will get it on the ballot and reality is they will get a majority of the vote to pass their ban. That's not emotion its based on today's Oregon political reality.

Even if you are correct about them pushing this through. I would much rather you write a lengthy post encouraging people to do everything they can to fight this. We know we face a rough battle, pretty sure everyone is aware of that. We know what the climate is. My only fear is that people will read this and decide to do nothing using this as an excuse to do nothing about it, because that is always easier. I don't believe this is be true. Actually recent polls averaged show that we are closing the gap, red was 15 points down in the polls and since this recent radical push for blatant tyrannical gun control we are now only 5 points down. People dont like gun control. We need those people to not think its hopeless, because its not. And even if it was, fighting against tyranny is the RIGHT thing to do.

 

[etrain16]

I expect the law, if passed, to be challenged and I will monetarily support the effort. Hopefully there will at least be a stay placed on it while the legality is being determined.

One question I have is that if a portion of a law is deemed unconstitutional, then is the entire law scrapped or just that portion?

I'm hopeful that NRA-ILA will finally come to Oregon and help us with this. Though I don't expect they would likely get involved until this was at least on the ballot, and maybe not until it passes (if it passes) - at that time, I would fully expect them to file a lawsuit to block it. Based on what was posted, somewhere on this forum (can't find it right now), the local NRA coordinator said they would be directly involved in this fight. I can't recall really hearing that from them before. Fact is, this law, if passed, sets a very dangerous precedent for gun rights around the country - it may have taken this level of attack on our rights to get the NRA to finally take notice of us here in OR. That said, I won't be giving them another cent until I see some real, concrete action in fighting this - even if it's after the fact in the form of a lawsuit. And if they do that (maybe SAF would get involved too?), then I will happily contribute to the cause.

 

[etrain16]

Certainly not THIS Attorney General, but I bet if the initiative was about removing firearm restrictions or overturning Fuhrer Brown's executive orders they would work around the clock to find a way to invalidate it

At least we have an SOS that can assure the initiative process, and signature gathering, is held to the letter of the law. It may not stop them, but I feel much better knowing this has to pass through Dennis Richardson.

 

[deadeye]

We need to work together not attack each other.

Please remember:
1. Be excellent to each other
Though this may sound a little 'out there', we couldn't phrase it better than our sixteenth president, Abraham Lincoln (captured on VHS circa 1989).

Websters defines excellent as "unusually good" or "much better than average". Our goal of welcoming all gun owners means you're likely to find a diverse group here. Going above and beyond when interacting with others you may disagree with is not easy, but it is a condition of your membership. You don't have to be warm and cuddly, but you do have to be courteous and respectful. When things get heated, simply avoid using the word you.

How you treat others here is a direct reflection on all gun owners, and believe us, people are watching. Opting for the high road is always the best choice, and arguing on the internet is pointless. Since we don't have time to babysit, we don't care who started it; most heated discussions result in both parties receiving a reminder. Continued friction between members is best dealt with via the ignore button.

This rule is purposely vague to inclusively prohibit a wide variety of rude, malicious, catty, sarcastic, hurtful, hateful, spiteful, barbed, and ornery behavior within the Northwest Firearms community including:

• General rudeness and disrespect (as outlined above).
• Epithets, labels, and generalizations against another person or group of people, whether they are members here or not. These serve absolutely no purpose other than to divide us, directly opposite to our goal of uniting gun owners. This is especially relevant in regard to political labels (such as 'the liberal media', 'those right-wingers', and even 'left/right'). Pro-gun and anti-gun are the only labels that should be applied here, as we are a single issue community. This rule also applies to but is not limited to epithets, labels, and generalizations pertaining to race, sex, sexual orientation, religion, age, ethnicity, nationality, occupation (such as law enforcement), and every other one you can think of. Disagreement over what constitutes a religion, race, sexual orientation, ethnicity, etcetra is not a legitimate excuse.
• Using someone's affiliations as an ad hominem means of dismissing or discrediting their views regardless of whether said affiliations are mainstream. An example could be "you're a vegetarian, so what would you know about hunting?".
• Linking to external attacks, harassment, or other material, for the purpose of attacking another member.
• Comparing members to Nazis, dictators, or other infamous persons.
• Accusations about personal behavior. If you believe a person's personal behavior is questionable, on or off the site, please contact a moderator.
• Giving out personal information about another member, such as name, phone number, address, etc.
  
  
  
• Threats, including, but not limited to:
  • Threats of legal action.
  • Threats of violence or other off-site action (particularly death threats).
  • Threats of physical or electronic vandalism.
  • Threats or actions which deliberately expose other members to political, religious or other persecution by government, their employer or any others.
  • Threats to give out personal information about another member.

These examples are not exhaustive. Insulting or disparaging another member is prohibited regardless of the manner in which it is done.