Oregon Bill makes it illegal to question laws

[saxon]

we need a 2A lawyer willing to use court precedence and take it the the Oregon supreme court, just like all the other cases have had or will go to their respective supreme courts'

 

[Unicykle]

This is just crazy They want to try and jam knowingly unconstitutional laws down our throat that pass by the slimmest of majorities when 33% of Oregonians didn't vote in 2022.

 

[ma96782]

Aloha, Mark

 

[PiratePast40]

we need a 2A lawyer willing to use court precedence and take it the the Oregon supreme court, just like all the other cases have had or will go to their respective supreme courts'

It'll take money. Need to dig deep again and support Oregon Firearms Federation and the others bringing these lawsuits. Oregon AG is doing whatever possible to bankrupt OFF and make it difficult for us to fight this kind of oppression.

 

[MichaelH]

Now that venue provision is some bullbubblegum. Striping courts that are otherwise equal of their authority to hear suits regarding the constitutionality of certain laws, and vesting power to hear those challenges in one court is just a power grab. Liberals shouldn't do that or they're no better than the Tennessee legislature.

I wonder if there is an equal protection argument to be made by someone wanting to challenge the law who lives in the far east of the state.

 

[CamoDeafie]

Liberals shouldn't do that or they're no better than the Tennessee legislature.

They are no better. Look at how they've spun the barely less than 1% difference between yes and no votes on the Measure 114 as "the mandate of the People"

 

[MichaelH]

They are no better. Look at how they've spun the barely less than 1% difference between yes and no votes on the Measure 114 as "the mandate of the People"

That's my point. If you already have the majority and the votes to pass your law, let the process work because you don't need to cheat. Though I think that this part of this law looks bad and should be removed, FWIW there is no guarantee that a challenge in Marion county would be a loss (or a win). There are some conservative judges there too.

 

[Provincial]

That's my point. If you already have the majority and the votes to pass your law, let the process work because you don't need to cheat. Though I think that this part of this law looks bad and should be removed, FWIW there is no guarantee that a challenge in Marion county would be a loss (or a win). There are some conservative judges there too.

For now. This makes it practical for progressive groups to focus the outside money on one circuit court district where they would ram through state-wide laws. It is all part of a set-up for single-party permanent rule.

 

[MichaelH]

For now. This makes it practical for progressive groups to focus the outside money on one circuit court district where they would ram through state-wide laws. It is all part of a set-up for single-party permanent rule.

We're leaning toward political here. Frankly, I'm far more concerned with the lack of democracy in other states from blatant power grabs. I think the writing is on the wall as far as gun rights go: SCOTUS is in favor of them even if it takes awhile.

 

[Bsteinhauer28]

It'll take money. Need to dig deep again and support Oregon Firearms Federation and the others bringing these lawsuits. Oregon AG is doing whatever possible to bankrupt OFF and make it difficult for us to fight this kind of oppression.

Or we could give our money to organizations who are more effectively fighting for us like GOA/FPC.

OFF lost all credibility and trust in my eyes after the stunt they pulled with 114.

 

[Aero Denezol]

Liberals shouldn't do that or they're no better than the Tennessee legislature.

They aren't any better and this is the current sad state of affairs. People cannot discuss things within the realm of possibility without going to absolutes.

Until the temperature of the room comes down there will continue to be more crazy antisocial behavior.

 

[CamoDeafie]

That's my point. If you already have the majority and the votes to pass your law, let the process work because you don't need to cheat. Though I think that this part of this law looks bad and should be removed, FWIW there is no guarantee that a challenge in Marion county would be a loss (or a win). There are some conservative judges there too.

How did you vote last election? If you voted other than Constitutional Party, Republican, or independent, you helped those currently in power to consolidate their power and allowed them to run roughshod over the minority voters bloc (no I don't mean "racial minority" I mean the rural conservatives and independents.)

We're leaning toward political here. Frankly, I'm far more concerned with the lack of democracy in other states from blatant power grabs.

eh, agree to disagree here.

I think the writing is on the wall as far as gun rights go: SCOTUS is in favor of them even if it takes awhile.

It'll take a while, and then the pendulum swings back to majority activist Judges eventually. However SCOTUS decisions means nothing without the ability for SCOTUS to enforce anything they order as long as the DOJ head, Merrick Garland is actively using the agencies to violate 2A.

 

[Stomper]

How did you vote last election? If you voted other than Constitutional Party, Republican, or independent, you helped those currently in power to consolidate their power and allowed them to run roughshod over the minority voters bloc (no I don't mean "racial minority" I mean the rural conservatives and independents.)



eh, agree to disagree here.


It'll take a while, and then the pendulum swings back to majority activist Judges eventually. However SCOTUS decisions means nothing without the ability for SCOTUS to enforce anything they order as long as the DOJ head, Merrick Garland is actively using the agencies to violate 2A.

Some people you just can't reach, so you get what we just had right here, which is the way he wants it, well he gets it. I don't like it any more than you do.

 

[titsonritz]

Aloha, Mark

So challenge it anyway, f' them, take it to the SCOTUS.

 

[Stomper]

So challenge it anyway, f' them, take it to the SCOTUS.

Take it to SCOTUS, and kick 'em square in the scrotus!!

 

[CamoDeafie]

So challenge it anyway, f' them, take it to the SCOTUS.

Take it to SCOTUS, and kick 'em square in the scrotus!!

"What difference does it make?" -Hillary.....

Does it matter when the DOJ refuse to enforce SCOTUS decisions and also blatantly ignore SCOTUS rulings regarding gun rights and such?

 

[Stomper]

"What difference does it make?" -Hillary.....

Does it matter when the DOJ refuse to enforce SCOTUS decisions and also blatantly ignore SCOTUS rulings regarding gun rights and such?

Be very careful you proggy beatches, "ignore-ance" cuts both ways.

 

[MichaelH]

How did you vote last election? If you voted other than Constitutional Party, Republican, or independent, you helped those currently in power to consolidate their power and allowed them to run roughshod over the minority voters bloc (no I don't mean "racial minority" I mean the rural conservatives and independents.)



eh, agree to disagree here.


It'll take a while, and then the pendulum swings back to majority activist Judges eventually. However SCOTUS decisions means nothing without the ability for SCOTUS to enforce anything they order as long as the DOJ head, Merrick Garland is actively using the agencies to violate 2A.

I doubt there is much I can say to explain my voting choices that doesn't run to the political outside of the topic of gun rights, because I'm not a single issue voter. I hold the opposite view and concerns you're expressing about specific political parties grabbing power in undemocratic ways. The demographics in our fair section of the country cut differently, so I do understand your frustration with Oregon State politics. My position is that no party, regardless of having the votes, should take actions that unfairly squelch the rights of the minority. But I think I might be an anachronism, because people in both major parties now seem to not give a s… about the citizens who hold different views. One side hasn't cared for a long time (e.g. Garland should have a different job), and the other side is tired of playing nice and losing.

It seems I can't even agree with some of you—like in this instance about the subject amendment—and not be chastised, so I don't need to say any more.

 

[Superglide]

What are the last ten words of the first amendment?

Asking for a friend….

 

[CamoDeafie]

I'm not a single issue voter.

One side has made it abundantly clear that the 2A and 1A is in their way. The other side has so far mostly paid lip service to any other Amendments but it is the 2A and 1A that should be driving the debate and nothing else really matters unless people believe that 1A and 2A are not limits onto the government.