Oregon Court Halts Mag Ban - from OFF

[v0lcom13sn0w]

shout out to midway usa for publicly posting they cannot send mags to oregon BECAUSE of m114. was a main talking point in the hearing

 

[tkdguy]

shout out to midway usa for publicly posting they cannot send mags to oregon BECAUSE of m114. was a main talking point in the hearing

maybe they will start selling?

 

[v0lcom13sn0w]

maybe they will start selling?

maybe, though thats entirely up to them. i hope they do.

 

[Yarome]

maybe they will start selling?

I somehow doubt it... right away, anyway. I'm sure their legal team knows as well as we do... the AG will be crying to the SC again, if she hasn't already. The first denial to the AG's petition was without prejudice.

 

[ilikegunspdx]

What's crazy.... if you turn your monitor around... it says "411". What does the telephone information line have to do with firearms??

Funny 411 call but kind of long.

 

[Yarome]

I really liked in his opinion too how he torpedoed the whole "public interest" argument. In a nutshell... 50.9% does not demonstrate significant or overhwhelming public interest in the proponents of measure 114.

Zing!

 

[dinky450]

I somehow doubt it... right away, anyway. I'm sure their legal team knows as well as we do... the AG will be crying to the SC again, if she hasn't already. The first denial to the AG's petition was without prejudice.

If the AG cries to the SC let them. The judge did a super good job with his decision and write up. All his findings were back with real stats and the data to back it up. He crushed the mag ban agenda it will be very hard for it to recover.

 

[tkdguy]

Do I understand this correctly but lots of government officials and prominent citizens and district attorneys advocated to take away our Oregon based constitutional rights with the proposed magazine ban? Including those that were recently elected to office in 2023? And the majority of voters voted to take away our rights in this area?

 

[Yarome]

Do I understand this correctly but lots of government officials and prominent citizens and district attorneys advocated to take away our Oregon based constitutional rights with the proposed magazine ban? Including those that were recently elected to office in 2023? And the majority of voters voted to take away our rights in this area?

You must be mistaken. That would be illegal.

 

[Yarome]

Rather interesting... I re-read the Honorable Judges opinion again, but inserted "permit to purchase" instead of "mag restriction".

Most of it pretty much works for that too! Foreshadowing??

 

[tkdguy]

You must be mistaken. That would be illegal.

How come the Dragonian Newspaper did not point this out to the citizens?

 

[L84Cabo]

I do not understand why one would want to let crooks have illegal firearms and magazines with 15-30 rounds but impose bans on law abiding citizens to only carry 10 rounds--since they are the potential victims?

Because it's not about "common sense" gun laws. It's about the slow, incremental whittling away of the right until all guns are illegal and confiscated.

 

[CZP07]

I somehow doubt it... right away, anyway. I'm sure their legal team knows as well as we do... the AG will be crying to the SC again, if she hasn't already. The first denial to the AG's petition was without prejudice.

Yah. It's not over until the fat lady sings.
But the Judge did make a pretty solid (IMHO) opinion in his letter. I'll be holding my breath for the appeal and the inevitable legislative moves to enact some, or all of this BM.

 

[Yarome]

Yah. It's not over until the fat lady sings.
But the Judge did make a pretty solid (IMHO) opinion in his letter. I'll be holding my breath for the appeal and the inevitable legislative moves to enact some, or all of this BM.

.....you said "BM".

 

[PiratePast40]

Yah. It's not over until the fat lady sings.
But the Judge did make a pretty solid (IMHO) opinion in his letter. I'll be holding my breath for the appeal and the inevitable legislative moves to enact some, or all of this BM.

Just started a new thread on that topic. https://www.northwestfirearms.com/threads/measure-114-legislation-2023-session.435081
The intent is to keep some information easy to find. I know, I know, someone will quickly comment about the legislature and what they can do with deez nutz, but at least trying to make an effort.

 

[Mikej]

Wow so much good info in the judges ruling. He really understands the real world effect this would have on Oregonians, making up to 1 in 5 citizens criminals overnight and subjecting them to arrest if they possessed a mag and then would have to prove their innocence:
View attachment 1330769

Would the wording in the above, if allowed to stand, make it possible for me to be arrested for robbing the 7-11 just down the road from me if I was found to have TWO 24OZ cans of of Steel Reserve in my fridge? If I had not taken a picture with time stamp, or had a receipt?

What kind of country, state, municipality, has "Discretion" to accuses a citizen of a crime and require the citizen to prove his innocence!!!! How is it possible the elected PUBLIC SERVANTS can let this become law?!?!?!??! Who the "F" are these people!?!?!

Ignore feature works for threads too. If the voluminous M114 threads bother you, consider making good use of the ignore feature. It may improve your life.

I found the ignore featureto be too much trouble. I use the little wheel on the mouse, or jump from page three to page seven, (or whatever page suits me). Or, use the back button. On ifish they locked all but ONE BM114 thread. With a stern warning that anyone starting another 114 thread would have it removed! And, of course, get the stern warning from a mod in your conversations!
Count your blessings here at NWFA and don't whine!

 

[arakboss]

Let me know when something else happens, meanwhile maybe we could talk some Shizz just like in the other ninety-seven 114 threads.

You could hit this button for the 96 you don't like.

 

[Jay Walk]

You could hit this button for the 96 you don't like.


View attachment 1330984

Nah, 8 out of 10 active threads on here are 114 specific. Not stopping now.

 

[Yarome]

Just started a new thread on that topic. https://www.northwestfirearms.com/threads/measure-114-legislation-2023-session.435081
The intent is to keep some information easy to find. I know, I know, someone will quickly comment about the legislature and what they can do with deez nutz, but at least trying to make an effort.

Just sayin... but isn't that the same thing as starting a whole 'nother 114 thread (that everyone can't stop complaining about) to have a clean start on a topic of interest to the person starting it??

Which is pretty much what everyone is doing and why we have so many friggin 114 threads.... right?

I'm guilty for replying to the TRO thread, instead of the 114 litigation thread.. but that was more to keep a seperation between the District court "litigation" and the State court "litigation". They don't exactly meet up and one will undoubtedly confuse the other.

To be successful, we probably need to get the admins and joe involved to post pinned thread. One for general litigtion announcements and one each for the various different lawsuits in subtopics. Then... establish strict posting rules and enforce them.

Otherwise this will be a vicious cycle. Start a thread until it get's too convoluted so someone decides it's time to start a fresh one... etc etc etc.. as we are doing now.

I understand the frustration, but I dunno if just starting up a clean slate is solving anything. Just ONE more 114 thread after another. Each one adding more confusion of what is posted where.

 

[ilikegunspdx]

Just sayin... but isn't that the same thing as starting a whole 'nother 114 thread (that everyone can't stop complaining about) to have a clean start on a topic of interest to the person starting it??

Which is pretty much what everyone is doing and why we have so many friggin 114 threads.... right?

I'm guilty for replying to the TRO thread, instead of the 114 litigation thread.. but that was more to keep a seperation between the District court "litigation" and the State court "litigation". They don't exactly meet up and one will undoubtedly confuse the other.

To be successful, we probably need to get the admins and joe involved to post pinned thread. One for general litigtion announcements and one each for the various different lawsuits in subtopics. Then... establish strict posting rules and enforce them.

Otherwise this will be a vicious cycle. Start a thread until it get's too convoluted so someone decides it's time to start a fresh one... etc etc etc.. as we are doing now.

I understand the frustration, but I dunno if just starting up a clean slate is solving anything. Just ONE more 114 thread after another.

To me there are threads/topics that are pretty damn critical, such as tracking the court cases, mag bans, bgc.

Then there were tons of them that are "what will ffl do with their x, y; what if this, what if that, here is some obscure tiny wrinkle I thought of", ad naseum. This is largely due to one poster who makes a new thread every time a thought pops in his head (this is the biggest source of the problem of too many threads on it Imo). But sometimes it's due to a person repeating the same question from another thread.

To me it's the single most important topic (relating to guns I mean) of our time by far, that's why people are so interested. So I think we need to be a little flexible as people are rightly pissed/concerned about it.