JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
how exactly would they prove that you're lying about owning BEFORE the date?

if they themselves have no F'n clue and theres no obvious markings on a magazine and if they have no online purchase or receipt?

Say you bought everything in cash years prior, how would someone accuse you of lying about it at the stand and proving beyond doubt you're lying??

chaos theory:

You go thru the effort to mark your mags and even take pics, what if they accuse you of altering evidence/tampering?
 
how exactly would they prove that you're lying about owning BEFORE the date?

if they themselves have no F'n clue and theres no obvious markings on a magazine and if they have no online purchase or receipt?

Say you bought everything in cash years prior, how would someone accuse you of lying about it at the stand and proving beyond doubt you're lying??

chaos theory:

You go thru the effort to mark your mags and even take pics, what if they accuse you of altering evidence/tampering?
I have a Glock 22 that I bought several years ago. It came with 3 - 15round magazines, says so right on the receipt.
 
Seems to be much ado about nothin... and some folks forgetting about due process... but nevertheless....

A sworn affidavit is admissable as evidence in a court proceeding. BOOM! Yer done and the ball goes into the prosecutions court to refute the evidence. Good luck with that, buddy! :s0155:

Marking, photoing can all be done after the fact and relies on the same premise as an affidavit. That you are being factual under penalty of perjury. Why give them any fuel to try and argue data manipulation?

IMO, KISS! If it ever becomes an issue, give them nothing but a statement on a piece of paper and let "them" try and prove you're lying.
 
Last Edited:
Say you bought everything in cash years prior, how would someone accuse you of lying about it at the stand and proving beyond doubt you're lying??
That's the joy of the "affirmative defense" BS. You are guilty until proven innocent. They don't have to prove anything.
 
That's the joy of the "affirmative defense" BS. You are guilty until proven innocent. They don't have to prove anything.
Thats what I am thinking, even if you had something what would stop them from saying otherwise and changing the juries mind?

My mindset is how would I convince a jury of know nothing gun unfriendly people in a hostile court in a blue liberal state. I get the onus is on me after being informed of that in the prior thread.

I have absolutely no trust/faith in the system not to ream me no matter how much evidence I give. Why should I trust a legal system that comes from the same system that just violated our rights in a hurry.
 
That's the joy of the "affirmative defense" BS. You are guilty until proven innocent. They don't have to prove anything.
There must still be grounds for a charge to enact the affirmative defense requirement. Due process still applies.

It's not as if a LEO or court can request that you defend yourself first, on a whim... "or else we'll charge you." The standards of proof for a charge are quite low, but it must first exist before there is any defense requirement.

If charged though then, yes... the burden is on the individual to prove innocence. [See "sworn affidavit" which then puts the burden back on the state] :s0155:
 
For being "the most restrictive anti gun law" in the nation... and the only one on the mid term ballots.... they definately left us holding the bag. No doubt about that. Utterly worthless.
Being active in the stock market, I have a lot of experience being a bag holder.
 
For being "the most restrictive anti gun law" in the nation... and the only one on the mid term ballots.... they definately left us holding the bag. No doubt about that. Utterly worthless.
Seems wa state last year had a lot more national attention from the 2a supporters.. we just needed the bill explained to those who are unfamilar with current laws.. we got cheated on 114 and i feel betrayed by the nra and other gun rights advocates.. deceitful written bill making it seem we dont have bgc currently, numerous people thought there were no bgc currently that voted.. beyond frustrated that the ammountbof money spent or not spent..
 
Last Edited:
I am thinking about becoming a "magazine expert" witness for defense attorney's and testify in court as to the age of said magazines. Could be a way to supplement my fixed income with all this inflation.
 
Many high capacity magazines I have actually came with firearms, all I have to prove for them is the seller's packing slip that says shop X sold to me firearm type Y on date so and so. Nothing in them says they came with a number of high capacity magazines, except maybe a seller's website for the sellers that are still in business.
My intent is if I get in trouble, I'm hiring the best lawyer in the state, I'm sending him out of state to the states where I got these firearms to gather evidence, and after I prove my innocence, I'm suing the police for every dime I pay out of my own pocket, I'm having the taxpayers pay to prove my innocence just like Brandon wants everyone to pay the student debt forgiveness 😂
 
I heard that the proponents of 114 had millions to campaign with but anti 114 had about $40k.
Where were our NRA dollars at work?
The last time I looked at the for and against campaigns, a few weeks ago, the for campaign had spent something like ~$135K, the against campaign had spent ~$25K or so (numbers are from memory). But the two campaigns had major funding gaps in the donations they received.
There.. these are the numbers…

B9E7C19D-6242-4075-8D23-219E8852E96F.jpeg
 
Last Edited:
I agree with @Yarome (and a lot of the rest of you) in that there gets to be a point where trying to prove you owned your mags before the effective date of the ballot measure is ridiculous.

But being a bit obsessive/compulsive on such matters, I've identified a strategy I "might" pursue.

Notarization.

A Notary can NOT notarize a photo. But they CAN notarize a STATEMENT from me about a photo(s), along with accompanying documents.

Given that I have a spreadsheet of all of my mags (told 'ya - a little OC), I could lay the mags out and take photos. I figure that even though I own hundreds of +10 mags collected over that past 40 years or so, I could group them and get by with 3 or 4 photos.

Then present a document for notarization with the spreadsheet and accompanying photos and a statement that I owned these mags before BM 114 was enacted.

Print out the photos, print out the spreadsheet, print out a statement with space for signatures, pay the notary, then throw it in my safe-deposit box.

Pics and docs would take about an hour. 30 more minutes to hit up my bank's Notary and shove it in the safe deposit box.

I don't need any more mags and can wait until BM 114 is struck down in court before I buy more +10 mags.

Not sure I'll do this, but then again, not sure I won't do this.

Take what you like and leave the rest.

Cheers

EDIT: I look at this strategy as a type of insurance. My motivation would be that on the very unlikely chance that I ended up being some DA's "test case" and "ticket to political advancement through prosecution", that my efforts in advance may stave off the need to spend thousands of dollars on an attorney. The attorney would probably get the case dismissed before it want to trial, but I guess I'd rather spend $50 and 90 minutes of my time as insurance. After all, I pay sh*t-ton of $$ for other types of insurance, why not here.
 
Last Edited:

Upcoming Events

Tillamook Gun & Knife Show
Tillamook, OR
"The Original" Kalispell Gun Show
Kalispell, MT
Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR
Kids Firearm Safety 2 Class
Springfield, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top