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

[newtonpo]

Like to post that on Farcebook,where i battle regularly with my liberal and left leaning friends over this and other pressing issues.

 

[DuneHopper]

This thread brings up some very interesting aspects for a solution, it seems the argument for such a proposal is based on the 2nd Amendment being old and not applying to the current laws, furthermore near all anti-liberals would clearly state if we wished to keep muskets then by all means we should but modern firearms shall not apply is the argument.

A solution would be for these ballot proponents to allow them selves to be shot at with a 3/4 inch musket ball, it should also be noted it was common place for them to carry 60 rounds or balls. Why we realized such a exhibition would cause possible death we suggest they allow them selves to be shot wearing body armor by a AR with .223 and a Musket w/ 3/4 ball and then tell us they are different. I am sure @AndyinEverson could help them out . It should be noted said ball will travel approx 1000-1200 FPS.

 

[Andy54Hawken]

My .54 will send a .530 round ball ,weighing around 220 grains , out there around 1520 FPS with a 80 grain charge...
And it has accounted for deer , black bear and elk...so I would think it would do a "whooping" on body armor as well....

It is kinda ironic that one needed on the average 60 rounds and a serviceable musket or rifle , to pass muster , during the American Revolution...yet some folks ( who claim to want freedom ) would limit our choices in firearms , ammunition and the amount on hand , today , when we have the Freedom's , that were so dearly fought and paid for then...
Andy

 

[DuneHopper]

My .54 will send a .530 round ball ,weighing around 220 grains , out there around 1520 FPS with a 80 grain charge...
And it has accounted for deer , black bear and elk...so I would think it would do a "whooping" on body armor as well....

It is kinda ironic that one needed on the average 60 rounds and a serviceable musket or rifle , to pass muster , during the American Revolution...yet some folks ( who claim to want freedom ) would limit our choices in firearms , ammunition and the amount on hand , today , when we have the Freedom's , that were so dearly fought and paid for then...
Andy

Its pretty interesting that have we fought with just pointy sticks and pitchforks in our Revolution how different things would be, yet today people are oblivious when compared to our military we are carrying sticks and pitchforks. Our military can hit a mark half way around the world, the Gov has the ability to imprison millions in the states at a moment notice, our every move on the internet is tracked and yet the lefties are concerned about a 30 round magazine that a private person uses. Tells you how very out of touch the left is as the local national guard in our towns are more heavily armed then most of the population excluding many on this forum,

 

[Oathkeeper1775]

The absurdity of the Constitutional protections in 2A rights being dated to the time of signatures is laughable; unless we also first dial back:

Driving priviledges for women...
Voting rights for women...
Undo all civil rights progress....!
Birth control...
Abortion...
Dress codes for women...
Segregation...
Self Identification...
The Patriot Act...
The size of govt....
Bibles restrictions in schools...
Food labeling...
Tobacco laws...
Seatbelt laws....
Globalism...
DUI penalties....
Food & Drug admin....
OSHA....
Building Codes & permits.....
The amount of taxes...

No more football helmets...
No more steroids...
No more legalized dope...
No more electric cars...
No more TV...
No more media...yay!
No more internet; telegraph only...
No more green energy laws...
Dial back duck limits & fees...
Dial back fish limits & fees...

Cut the amount of free shist to 1890s levels:

Food (only govt. cheese....)
Heathcare
Transpo
College tuition
Housing

And let's bring back 1890s:
School disciplne
Curfew
Prayer
Pledge of Allegiance

Wrap EVERYTHING all together; all our modern liberties, and dial them back to the 1890s, then and only then can they try to dial back 2A...

But the vision of the Left is unconstrained; they are trapped in an endless labrinth of Inductive Reasoning and sedistic thoughts towards Individual Liberty.

So, we fight

 

[Looperman]

Ok everyone. Say whatever you want but when the time comes the most important thing to do is VOTE.

 

[Cavedweller]

Sec of State approves signatures, requests ballot title:

​

Secretary of State
Elections Division
oregonvotes.gov
Contact: [email protected] | 503-986-1518 | Toll Free 1-866-673-VOTE

Initiative Petition




On April 16, 2018, the Elections Division determined Initiative Petition 2018-043, proposed for the November 6, 2018, General Election, contained the required number of sponsorship signatures and has requested the Attorney General draft a ballot title.





Subject Provided by Chief Petitioners
Promote Public Safety for All Through the Reduction of Assault Weapons and Large Capacity Magazines



Chief Petitioners
Walter John Knutson, 4526 NE 27th Ave Portland, OR 97211
Michael Z. Cahana, 3139 SW Fairmount Blvd. Portland, OR 97239
Alcena E. Boozer, 5256 NE 48th Ave. Portland, OR 97218



Draft Ballot Title Due from Attorney General
April 24, 2018





More information, including the text of the initiative and number of sponsorship signatures determined to be valid, is contained in the IRR Database available at www.oregonvotes.gov.

 

[rfmjchp]

If I read this law correctly, current residents of Oregon get a chance to register assault rifles and large capacity magazines. Anybody who moves into Oregon after a certain date doesn't get a chance to register ARs and large cap magazines. I do like the wording though.
"...person who moves into the state and immediately prior to moving is in lawful possession of..." Who thinks up this stuff.

 

[jordanvraptor]

Don't know if someone has said this already but I think it is physically impossible to comply with this law if it is passed. It says all assault weapons must be registered or removed, etc within 120 days of passage. Registration requires a background check. 120 days times 14 hours a day the FICS unit operates equals 1,680 hours to background check almost every semi automatic firearm in Oregon... Even if there were only 500,000 assault weapons, that is 297 background checks per hour. In 2016 there were about 300,000 total checks with about 250,000 being the average for preceding years. I figure there are more than 500,000 of these assault weapons in Oregon but even so, it cannot physically be done with current staffing and funding levels. Just thought I would throw some math into the equation...

 

[Doc In UPlace]

Very well done post, tkd; thank you for the effort!

I am surprised to see you left out this one:
"

www.cdc.gov
Cigarette smoking is responsible for more than 480,000 deaths per year in the United States, including more than 41,000 deaths resulting from secondhand smoke exposure. This is about one in five deaths annually, or 1,300 deaths every day."

March 26 at 8:27am
...
But what about other deaths each year?
• 40,000+ die from a drug overdose–THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR THAT!
• 36,000 people die per year from the flu, far exceeding the criminal gun deaths.
• 34,000 people die per year in traffic fatalities(exceeding gun deaths even if you include suicide).
...
• 200,000+ people die each year (and growing) from preventable medical errors. You are safer walking in the worst areas of Chicago than you are when you are in a hospital!
• 710,000 people die per year from heart disease.

 

[DuneHopper]

Don't know if someone has said this already but I think it is physically impossible to comply with this law if it is passed. It says all assault weapons must be registered or removed, etc within 120 days of passage. Registration requires a background check. 120 days times 14 hours a day the FICS unit operates equals 1,680 hours to background check almost every semi automatic firearm in Oregon... Even if there were only 500,000 assault weapons, that is 297 background checks per hour. In 2016 there were about 300,000 total checks with about 250,000 being the average for preceding years. I figure there are more than 500,000 of these assault weapons in Oregon but even so, it cannot physically be done with current staffing and funding levels. Just thought I would throw some math into the equation...

Good info.

 

[tkdguy]

Only, 500,000 semi auto rifles, how many pistols that meet their criteria?

 

[PDXbiker]

Only, 500,000 semi auto rifles, how many pistols that meet their criteria?

And lets not forget all those high cap mags with no serial numbers. This proposed registry is an absolute joke.

 

[DuneHopper]

Lets not also forget all those boat accidents

 

[Maximum1]

Turn your outrage into ACTION... File your ballot title objection! Objections are due to the Elections office by Tuesday, May 8th.

If you have formally submitted your ballot objection to the Elections Department then your fellow patriots thank you.

Initiative 43 UPDATE...The Elections Division Received a Propose Ballot Title from the Attorney General.

Yes, they really are coming for your guns!

The Elections Division received a draft ballot title from the Attorney General on Tuesday April 24, 2018, for Initiative Petition 2018-043, proposed for the November 6, 2018, General Election.

The ballot title as proposed by the extremist Attorney General is, "Criminalizes Possession or Transfer of "Assault Weapons" or "Large Capacity Magazines"

To read these words in the ballot title should not only send chills up the spine of every Oregonian it's an offense to everyone who believes it's our Right To KEEP And Bear Arms. And the ballot title falls far short of covering all the dangerous and onerous provisions of this measure!

Here is the link to the official proposed ballot title as submitted by the Oregon Attorney General.
http://oregonvotes.org/irr/2018/043dbt.pdf

As I have posted previously we need as many people as possible to submit a formal objections to the Attorney General's proposed ballot title. Objections must be received by the Oregon Elections Division by May 8, 2018. Comments may be submitted via email, fax or postal mail. Send ballot title objections via emails to [email protected], send via fax to 503-373-7414, or sent via postal mail to Oregon Elections Division 255 Capitol St NE Ste 501, Salem OR 97310.

PLEASE NOTE: The Secretary of State did not make this point clear, and it is VERY IMPORTANT, all comments that are submitted via email, fax or mail must be "signed." So while you can print out your comments, sign them and scan them and send the scanned documents to the Secretary of State via email, a simple email with your comments will not work! What you if you don't have a scanner? You can take a clear photo of your written signed objections then attach it to the email. I prefer mailing it but it must be received by May 8th!

Under Oregon, ORS 250.035(2)-(5) the proposed ballot title by the Attorney General (1) must accurately state the subject matter of the Initiative, and (2) may not be politically charged and be emotionally laden description which is in violation of Supreme Court's case law on Initiative Ballot Titles. The title cannot mislead the voters of Oregon!

Clearly the title fails to meet Oregon state law (ORS 250.035). The proposed ballot title for Initiative 43 as written does not accurately state the subject matter of the petition given the fact Initiative 43 intends to go beyond co-called "assault weapon" given the fact it also covers semi-auto pistols and some semi-auto shotguns. At the very least

It's misleading given the fact voters will have no idea they are voting to ban certain semi-auto pistol and semi-auto shotguns given the ballot title.

So I urge everyone to submit their formal objections. Objections MUST BE FOCUSED ON the actual ballot title under oregon law. Any objections to do with the constitutionality of the Initiative will be disregarded. So focus on objections to the actual ballot title.

As an example here is a portion of my formal objection that will be filed with the Oregon Elections Division.

"The ballot title, which is the first information that most potential petition signers and voters will see, is pivotal. Frazzini v. Myers, 344 Or. 648, 654, 189 P.3d 1227 (2008). It must ''inform potential petition signers and voters of the sweep of the measure.'' Id. citing Terhune v. Myers, 342 Ore. 475, 479, 154 P.3d 1284 (2007)". Accordingly, a caption cannot focus on only one thread of a petition, but instead must focus on the entire blanket, so as TO ENCOMPASS ALL THE SUBJECTS COVERED BY THE MEASURE. See Witt v. Myers, 325 Or. 221, 936 P.2d 964 (1997). A proposed ballot title which only includes the words "assault weapon" does not meet Oregon case law as referenced above.

Yours does not require any state law or case law references simply expanded on the following three themes

Here are three suggested main themes you can follow.

Ballot Title
(1) does not accurately state the subject matter of the Petition, and (2) it uses politically charged and emotionally laden terms in violation of Oregon case law, and (3) It misleads voters into believing Initiative 43 only covers co-called assault rifles.

If you are not receiving email alert. The State of Oregon Elections Division made it much easier to sign up to receive messages from the Oregon Secretary of State about State Initiative and notification including for the gun grabbing Initiative 43.

If you have not signed up here is the link; Oregon Secretary of State Dennis Richardson

 

[Maximum1]

And lets not forget all those high cap mags with no serial numbers. This proposed registry is an absolute joke.

Frankly it's no joke. They will outlaw them and make it illegal to buy, possess, etc.

 

[jordanlund]

I consider myself a Liberal, even though that always seems to be a dirty word here. But this is garbage. Total and complete crock of bubblegum.

Liberal gun owners unite! That's what's going to sink this, coming together regardless of ideology to sink a law that's just, just awful in every regard.

 

[Cavedweller]

Just realized this after rereading IP 43: If it passes, even if you register your semi-auto you will not be able to go plinking in the woods, or hunt with it even if you use a 5 round mag. The only place you will be able to use it is at a facility designed and built for target shooting (i.e. the range).

 

[Asp]

Is anyone here for initiative 43? I mean to say, if there are additions such as, zero exemptions for law enforcement (including federal agents, IRS, Atf, DHS, etc), private contract/security, and national guard-- wouldya then be for it? I'd be for initiative 43 if the police had to surrender or register all private arms, and/or pay the fee out of pocket. Then while going to work, they had to be in compliance with the law. I should also note, I would need 4 bags of popcorn to watch law enforcement wrap their head around a situation like that.

 

[DuneHopper]

I am trying to get clarification, a friend of mine who is involved in Salem reported that the way #43 is being written the registration can be made public and by-pass current firearms ownership laws that do not allow that.
Because this would not a firearms ownership issue therefore the OSP standard for security of that info would not apply... I sure hope the NRA and OFF are aware of this. This is by the way not him stating it but is among discussions and how to warn the public on who owns these. This will become a witch hunt with people easily using recent laws passed that allow others to say you are dangerous and have your firearms removed. Since Kevin Starret nor the NRA will listen to me, so anyone connected to them might want to let them know to look into this as this ballot would allow all these laws to intersect and do allot.