Oregon HB2005 Litigation - Unserialized/Undetectable Ban

[Will_White]

Still no updates on this challenge?

 

[JGSFAB]

Still no updates on this challenge?

Hell , where's the wave of enforcement and confication making us so much safer?

Oh wait its only for "law abiding gun owners".

 

[SCARed]

Still no updates on this challenge?

Come out from under that rock. It's been to SCOTUS already.

Supreme Court upholds regulation on ghost guns

This article was update on March 26 at 2:04 p.m. The Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld a Biden-era rule regulating so-called ghost guns untraceable weapons without serial numbers, assembled from […]

scotusblog.com

 

[CamoDeafie]

Come out from under that rock. It's been to the Supreme Court already.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.scotusblog.com/2025/03/supreme-court-upholds-regulation-of-ghost-guns/&ved=2ahUKEwj5i7z_s_6MAxWDITQIHcHKOLEQFnoECBYQAQ&usg=AOvVaw3tlDEpn67aSgHZC6rYMEF5

Lol. He's talking about the Oregon HB2005 and not the Federal rules/regulation/Final ruling for Frames and Receivers.

 

[CamoDeafie]

Montgomery v. Rosenblum - FPC Law 2A Challenge to OR's Ban on Self-Built Firearms

Montgomery v. Rosenblum - FPC Law 2A Challenge to OR's Ban on Self-Built Firearms

www.firearmspolicy.org

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69015818/montgomery-v-rosenblum/?filed_after=&filed_before=&entry_gte=&entry_lte=&order_by=desc

clicky to embiggen to see the Ninth's insane reasoning re "common use"

 

[Ura-Ki]

Lol. He's talking about the Oregon HB2005 and not the Federal rules/regulation/Final ruling for Frames and Receivers.

Even better, that ruling was very narrowly written, and leaves room for further challenges, so it's not really a defacto case law, at least not in the broader sense, they specifically said certain parts and or kits, not an outright blanket sort of ruling like "All home made guns are now illegal regardless of what percentage of completion they started out as" sort of language, or that you cannot now build from a kit and NOT affix a SN on the frame, or any of that bullbubblegum!t, nope, they left it wide open for later!

 

[CamoDeafie]

Ninth District insane reasoning re "common use"

 

[SCARed]

Does it matter? SCOTUS has said yes, they can be regulated. I guess then, the differentiation is just the States requirement to retroactively put a serial number on the PMF.

 

[CamoDeafie]

Does it matter? SCOTUS has said yes, they can be regulated. I guess then, the differentiation is just the States requirement to retroactively put a serial number on the PMF.

Yes it matters because the HB2005 directly reference two Federal laws, 18 USC 923(I) and 27 CFR 478.92

 

[Will_White]

Does it matter? SCOTUS has said yes, they can be regulated. I guess then, the differentiation is just the States requirement to retroactively put a serial number on the PMF

You can buy a shelf from IKEA and put it together or you can buy wood (or plastic) and make it yourself. This ruling only covers the first shelf not the second shelf.

 

[Ura-Ki]

You can buy a shelf from IKEA and put it together or you can buy wood (or plastic) and make it yourself. This ruling only covers the first shelf not the second shelf.

More then that, it doesn't say you can't build from certain kits, only some kits, but they DID NOT specify any specifics, so by your own example above, they didn't say you cannot buy and build from an IKEA shelf kit, only implying that the level of completion of the IKEA kit was in question!

 

[Will_White]

More then that, it doesn't say you can't build from certain kits, only some kits, but they DID NOT specify any specifics, so by your own example above, they didn't say you cannot buy and build from an IKEA shelf kit, only implying that the level of completion of the IKEA kit was in question!

Yeah the only thing it explicitly bans is the polymer pistol kits. 80% AR lowers would still need to be litigated. Either way, it explicitly doesn't ban 3d printed or conventionally made firearms, and probably building from raw forgings but thats a grey area.

Regardless, it isn't an affirmation of HB2005.

 

[JGSFAB]

"Undetectable", there's already a percentage of metal required in all functional arms. Banning stuff that's already ILLEGAL, go blue team go.
All lies and half-truth to accomplish the ultimate goal, stomping an amendment.
Guns first, privacy next (already in process), finally non-government approved speech- oh I mean "misinformation".

I can't even get a gubberment permission slip to excise my "right".

 

[nammac]

Guess this state government is recreating the lessons of 1939 Germany….

Awaiting a knock on the door from Tina's Brownshirts…

 

[TheShanMan]

How can that be? I thought that the germany comparisons apply to the orange man, and the dems are the ones saving our democracy!

 

[Will_White]

How can that be? I thought that the germany comparisons apply to the orange man, and the dems are the ones saving our democracy!

What if I told you both parties don't care about our rights.

 

[TheShanMan]

What if I told you it's a spectrum and on average, they're not both at the same spot on that spectrum? What if I told you some are worse than others?

 

[msgriff]

What if I told you both parties don't care about our rights.

Would you like to see the Oregon House and Oregon Senate voting results of HB2005 by party? Take a guess on which party voted unanimously to pass HB2005.

 

[Will_White]

Would you like to see the Oregon House and Oregon Senate voting results of HB2005 by party? Take a guess on which party voted unanimously to pass HB2005.

I'm aware of which party says that they care about our gun rights, but until they start actually doing something about it I'm not going to sing their praises.

They could pass national constitutional carry and repeal the NFA or atleast the Hughes ammendment and remove SBS, SBR, AOW, and supressors from the NFA tommorow but it's not going to even be seriously talked about for another 2 years when they lose the house and senate because of Trump "take the guns first due process later"

 

[old greg]

Would you like to see the Oregon House and Oregon Senate voting results of HB2005 by party? Take a guess on which party voted unanimously to pass HB2005.

I think their point is that historically, both major parties have been bad for gun rights, one is just far more open about their disdain.

I mean just look at california, you used to be able to open carry an ak47 before reagan. But some folks really dont want to acknowledge that, or maybe cause now its mostly dems and their awb and 11+ round mag bans.

But honestly, left wing right wing you can stuff the lot. Under no pretext and all that jazz