- Messages
- 1,669
- Reactions
- 1,283
I have the opportunity to talk to a Gun rights lawyer who may well be taking these bills to task on a federal level and am looking for input as to questions you all may have about how we can overturn and completely stop this madness, keep in mind this that,
Oregon courts, have asserted that Article I section 27 of Oregon's Constitution is not coextensive with the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution. According to state courts, Oregon's Constitution protects only firearms that are similar to those commonly possessed by citizens when the state constitution was approved in 1859.
This is pre Heller decision.
one of the questions I already have is
Q?-1
a majority of people are talking about a real civil war over the loss of gun rights,
(gun bans, red flag laws, age discrimination, magazine capacity laws)
Yet no one is actually willing to stand up and say "Enough, no more or we will fight"
No one actually wants to stand up and be that one person who has to again Die for freedom
So What can we do to keep from,
#1 loosing our rights as a whole
#2 becoming servants of a dictatorship
Q?-2
in light of the Heller decision, Marbury v. Madison
Teixeira Et Al v. County of Alameda Et Al decisions,
where
the U.S. Constitution is actual "law", not just a statement of political principles and ideals,
where
One cannot truly enjoy a constitutionally protected right when the State is permitted to snuff out the means by which he exercises it; one cannot keep arms when the State prevents him from purchasing them, also
("without bullets, the right to bear arms would be meaningless.");
Ezell v. City of Chicago , 651 F.3d 684, 704 (7th Cir. 2011)
the question is this,
seeing as the Oregon supreme court is supposed to also be in part subject to the US supreme court, what can we do or how do we go about getting Oregon to have a more conservative view of the constitution?
please don't use this as a ranting thread I would like to keep the discussion to questions to ask the person who may well be fighting for our rights.
Oregon courts, have asserted that Article I section 27 of Oregon's Constitution is not coextensive with the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution. According to state courts, Oregon's Constitution protects only firearms that are similar to those commonly possessed by citizens when the state constitution was approved in 1859.
This is pre Heller decision.
one of the questions I already have is
Q?-1
a majority of people are talking about a real civil war over the loss of gun rights,
(gun bans, red flag laws, age discrimination, magazine capacity laws)
Yet no one is actually willing to stand up and say "Enough, no more or we will fight"
No one actually wants to stand up and be that one person who has to again Die for freedom
So What can we do to keep from,
#1 loosing our rights as a whole
#2 becoming servants of a dictatorship
Q?-2
in light of the Heller decision, Marbury v. Madison
Teixeira Et Al v. County of Alameda Et Al decisions,
where
the U.S. Constitution is actual "law", not just a statement of political principles and ideals,
where
One cannot truly enjoy a constitutionally protected right when the State is permitted to snuff out the means by which he exercises it; one cannot keep arms when the State prevents him from purchasing them, also
("without bullets, the right to bear arms would be meaningless.");
Ezell v. City of Chicago , 651 F.3d 684, 704 (7th Cir. 2011)
the question is this,
seeing as the Oregon supreme court is supposed to also be in part subject to the US supreme court, what can we do or how do we go about getting Oregon to have a more conservative view of the constitution?
please don't use this as a ranting thread I would like to keep the discussion to questions to ask the person who may well be fighting for our rights.
