Oregon HB 3223 Assault Weapon Ban

[Nick Burkhardt]

HB 3223 is now in committee.

HB3223 2019 Regular Session - Oregon Legislative Information System

It really pisses me off that Tina Kotex threw our voice Bill Post out of the Judiciary Committee.

 

[tiggers97]

No scheduled hearing dates so far.

Judiciary House 2019 Regular Session - Oregon Legislative Information System

That is the link to the house judiciary committee which would have the first hearing on the bill whenever it is scheduled. I have had okay success emailing each one separately and respectfully voicing my opposition.

If it's any consolation, there are 138 bills in the house judiciary committee right now. It looks like yesterday they spent the entire session talking about one bill. I guess it depends on how motivated they are to get HB 3223 this session.

That was too quick for me between submitting and assigning to a committee.
Well, seems like we need to keep them talking about all the bills then, and reminding them this bill is NOT a priority.

 

[Knebel]

alright I did my due diligence and emailed all of them with a long letter on how I feel about this and that all they do is drive me from being a former liberal to someone who wants to vote them out of office.

Anyhow,different question on the wording in that bill. It says that definition of assault weapon means "capable of a detachable magazin and any ONE of the following..yada yada" but then says "means fixed magazine of greater than 10rds". Do they mean... it is still considered an assault weapon if it has one of the features plus a fixed mag greater than 10rds? The wording is a little odd... If I have a bunch of 30rd mags but can only load them i to the gun with a tool or...by removing the ak dustcover... anyway,i feel like this is not THAT clear on mag capacity.

If i think AK platform, keep the "features" and fix a 30rd... or does the fixed one have to be 10rds? Loose the "features" and be able to use detachable 30rd magazines? Obviously I would not want to register anything!? It sounds relatively easy to me to comply with this should it pass. I personally would just need to fix the folding stock, weld on the thread protector and idk...get one of those kydex pistolgrip things and then its featureless? or keep it how it is and fix the magazine and restrict to 10rds?

 

[FordPrefect]

alright I did my due diligence and emailed all of them with a long letter on how I feel about this and that all they do is drive me from being a former liberal to someone who wants to vote them out of office.

Anyhow,different question on the wording in that bill. It says that definition of assault weapon means "capable of a detachable magazin and any ONE of the following..yada yada" but then says "means fixed magazine of greater than 10rds". Do they mean... it is still considered an assault weapon if it has one of the features plus a fixed mag greater than 10rds? The wording is a little odd... If I have a bunch of 30rd mags but can only load them i to the gun with a tool or...by removing the ak dustcover... anyway,i feel like this is not THAT clear on mag capacity.

If i think AK platform, keep the "features" and fix a 30rd... or does the fixed one have to be 10rds? Loose the "features" and be able to use detachable 30rd magazines? Obviously I would not want to register anything!? It sounds relatively easy to me to comply with this should it pass. I personally would just need to fix the folding stock, weld on the thread protector and idk...get one of those kydex pistolgrip things and then its featureless? or keep it how it is and fix the magazine and restrict to 10rds?

Your guess would be as good as mine. The only purpose of laws like this is to make more criminals. It's a simple fact that this law will not prevent any crime nor save any life. It is just to disarm the population, pure and simple. If they don't disarm, then they will have some nice confusing laws to basically entrap anybody that can't read between all the lines.

 

[ilikegunspdx]

I wonder what would happen if every gun owner in the USA purchased assault rifles and then refused to register them? They can't put everyone in jail. The registration law would become all but meaningless. "Buy a gun. Refuse to comply." would be a good t-shirt

 

[tiggers97]

Some more info on Oregon statistics:

Some general knowledge to help and share on the issue:
Oregon Crime Statistics Don't Justify Gun Control Push
This info is good for more than just HB3223. You can add to the list drunk driving: every year 2-3 times as many people die from drunk driving than they do from homicides committed with a firearm (FBI vs National Highway Traffic Safety Administration or NHTSA data). Where are the hard-liquor bans, or liquor cabinet lockup laws?

Another saying is that "when the assault weapon ban was in place, mass shootings went down. When it expired, they went way up". But there is never a distinction between "non-assault weapon" and "assault weapon" mass shootings. If this was a clinical trial, it would be considered a failure as there was no difference between the control groups.
Klarevas' false claims about the federal assault weapons ban and mass public shootings

Note: the link is to John Lotts page. Which I would actually avoid using. Nothing on his page is incorrect (I've independently verified using data provided by the author Klarevas himself before I saw Lotts page), but as soon as you mention Lotts name, everything else you say will be automatically dismissed (i.e. dismiss the facts). There are other sources, but this was the quickest and most easily to digest.

And finally; why are things like collapsing stocks considered a 'military feature'? Does it make the gun shoot faster? Harder? An analogy would be if someone shares a car with someone shorter or taller. My wife is 5' even. When I get into the car, I adjust the front seat so I can drive safely. Same thing for a rifle with a collapsing stock: its so a tall person can hand it to a short person, and the short person can adjust it to their body type to safely handle the firearm. Similar analogies can be made for most of the other items listed in HB3223.

Hope people finds this type of info useful.

 

[Aero Denezol]

Time to create another state east of the Willamette Valley?

Just make Portland a separate state.

 

[2hawk]

Been lurking awhile, but this has my attention.

Will not comply should be the strong message to those who make law. Let it be known that they will have made a lot of law-abiding citizens into criminals by their actions, and we will not go along with their plan. Put it on the line, see what they do. I think their threats are only as good as their willingness to arrest large numbers of people, and we know how that works. Think of all the demonstrations, with hardly anyone in custody after mayhem.

Will Not Comply!

 

[dancinghippos]

Do you have link to that final decision the mag ban court case?

My understanding is that the 9th upheld a lower courts injunction of the mag ban until the case is decided. I don't think the case has been decided yet but I have been wrong many times?

What I saw in the original link to the law firm was that the 9th did not decide anything other than to uphold an injunction against enforcement until the full matter is decided in courts later.

 

[dancinghippos]

For the upcoming rally, ideas for signs:
Make 20 inch by 30 inch signs. Use two 20" x 30" thick signboard. I used 1/8" white foam placards from a big box stationary store.
Put a slogan on each one in fat indelible marker or paint. Staple or tape them together, leaving an opening in the bottom. Slide a grapestake or other thin wood in, staple or otherwise attach. Now you have a two-sided sign big enough for onlookers and TV cameras to see.
Ideas for slogans:
GUNS SAVE LIVES
GUNS STOP CRIMINALS
GUNS STOP CRIME
STOP PUNISHING INNOCENT GUN OWNERS
THOSE WHO IGNORE MURDER LAWS IGNORE GUN LAWS TOO
IF YOU LET THEM TAKE YOUR GUNS, WHAT WILL THEY TAKE NEXT?
WHEN SECONDS COUNT, POLICE ARE ONLY MINUTES AWAY

You get the point. Something easy to see and understand. Make a lot of noise. Go to the rally on the 23rd. And flood the legislators with calls, emails and letters stating firmly but plainly your opposition to more gun laws. If you look for my old posts, you will see lots of ideas and links to supporting data.

 

[Librarian]

Just to add detail: the Oregon Secretary of State has a web page on
Initiatives, Referendums and Referrals

The number of valid signatures required to qualify an initiative for the ballot is based on a percentage of the total votes cast for governor at the last election:

• For a constitutional initiative, 8% (117,578) of valid signatures is required.
  
• For a statutory initiative, 6% (88,184) of valid signatures is required.

https://sos.oregon.gov/elections/Pages/initiatives-referendums-referrals.aspx

 

[Savage Jav]

What Is Libertarian?

But then, every republican here will say "oh, can't vote libertarian because they can never win".

View attachment 555648

Would rather "throw my vote away" on a candidate I believe in. Than a meaningful vote to someone who will do nothing for me. Also if they get enough vote they can get public match funding. Its a long road but its very do able.

 

[Knebel]

This:

"Libertarianism is the view that each person has the right to live his life in any way he chooses so long as he respects the equal rights of others. Libertarians defend each person's right to life, liberty, and property-rights that people have naturally, before governments are created. In the libertarian view, all human relationships should be voluntary; the only actions that should be forbidden by law are those that involve the initiation of force against those who have not themselves used force-actions like murder, rape, robbery, kidnapping, and fraud."

Is not what nowadays libertarians are like. What most people refer to liberals (not libertarians) for example are actually not even liberals, they are fundamental leftists. However, the description there is 100% how I actually think. I also think that for a functioning and happy society there are a couple more "needs" that benefit the population but restricting rights and forcing an opinion down someones throat are none of those.

 

[The Heretic]

This:

"Libertarianism is the view that each person has the right to live his life in any way he chooses so long as he respects the equal rights of others. Libertarians defend each person's right to life, liberty, and property-rights that people have naturally, before governments are created. In the libertarian view, all human relationships should be voluntary; the only actions that should be forbidden by law are those that involve the initiation of force against those who have not themselves used force-actions like murder, rape, robbery, kidnapping, and fraud."

Is not what nowadays libertarians are like. What most people refer to liberals (not libertarians) for example are actually not even liberals, they are fundamental leftists. However, the description there is 100% how I actually think. I also think that for a functioning and happy society there are a couple more "needs" that benefit the population but restricting rights and forcing an opinion down someones throat are none of those.

There are a LOT of people who call themselves something they are not. Don't mistake them for what they say they are unless they actually are that thing. Yes, a LOT of people call themselves libertarian because they believe in supporting one small issue they share with real libertarians, but it is simple to see if they are truly libertarian; ask them about some other right that we all have - in short, are they consistent across the board?

It doesn't take long - I ask them about whether they support the right to possess almost anything; guns, drugs, porn whatever. If they do, then I ask them if every adult has the right to marry/love whomever they want? To have multiple spouses if they want? Do they believe that a person can worship or not worship whomever they want? And so on. Eventually, usually sooner than later, you get down to some action/thing that they don't allow which doesn't force on another person.

Conversely, do they support laws that infringe on our rights? Gun laws? Marriage laws? Porn laws? Drug laws? sex laws? Religious laws? Do they support income redistribution (theft by taxation)?

Whenever a discussion turns to politics in a general group, I rarely find anyone who doesn't support one of those things, whether they say they are libertarian or not. Left, Right - very similar; they both want to control other people by using government power. That is why they can never vote Libertarian; it isn't about "wasting" a vote - they don't want to give up that desire to control other people.

 

[FordPrefect]

Whenever a discussion turns to politics in a general group, I rarely find anyone who doesn't support one of those things, whether they say they are libertarian or not. Left, Right - very similar; they both want to control other people by using government power. That is why they can never vote Libertarian; it isn't about "wasting" a vote - they don't want to give up that desire to control other people.

I may be your unicorn then. Anything that government does is force. I don't want power, I want to be left alone.

 

[Knebel]

I agree too, i want to be left alone. I even believe there should be no tax. And why do I need to pay the government and ask for permission to find a nice spot and build me shelter lol. Again, I do think one should have whatever they want and do whatever they want as long as it does not takes someone elses (even though that would be hypocrite since americans just stole landlfrom the natives) however, if this was the 1700, things would be different, but modern times unfortunately do require some basic things to make a society work (healthcare for example) I dont understand why so many people are against it, yet my father in laws quadruple bypass is payed by MY money because hes a veteran. That doesn't change the fact that he is larding himself up with stake and burgers while I have to pay for his hospital visits. Its just not right, tax funded healthcare for everyone or nobody, for example.

 

[Ura-Ki]

What they call assault rifles I call Modern Sporting Rifles. You know like mini14s...and ARs

Unfortunatly, the State of Wash. Has already set president of what they determin an assault weapon to be, what features and configuration it is! Right or wrong, you poor souls now have to contend with that B.S!

 

[Jcon268]

Unfortunatly, the State of Wash. Has already set president of what they determin an assault weapon to be, what features and configuration it is! Right or wrong, you poor souls now have to contend with that B.S!

Doesn't change the fact that they're wrong. They can call a dog a chicken too. Fact is, they'll change the dictionary right out from under you. I take that back....they'll BUY the dictionary and then re-publish it. They'll also say:
socialism
noun
so·cial·ism | \ ˈsō-shə-ˌli-zəm \
1a: a system of society in which rainbows lead to pots of gold and unicorns are free to frolic across open green pastures and feast off of the abundance of life-sustaining crops and vegetation.
b: a system or condition of society in which the government is your friend. Without government, you will not succeed. You must join the system. It is imperative.

 

[arakboss]

Oregonpushback says House Judiciary Committee is getting ready to move on gun grabbing bills. Waiting for details but we need to get our writing caps on and plan work day rally soon.

Edit: I just checked the schedule on HB 3223, 3265 and 2251 none show anything on the schedule. Not sure where Oregonpushback is getting their info but....

 

[DivCurlGrad72]

It's quiet ... too quiet.