Lift Every Voice says they met IP17 signature goal...

[oregonferret]

Yes, and all semi-automatic weapons will be illegal unless they are registered with the state police. You will also be required to obtain a permit to purchase firearms. After all of this, they will be queueing up IP 18.

When IP 17 passes, Oregon will be the most restrictive state in the US in terms of Draconian gun legislation.

Oregon to Washington after the magazine ban: "Here, hold my beer."

 

[Saladfarmer]

My question.. If SCOTUS just told CA, HI, NY, NJ and others to retry their lawsuits concerning AWB, mag bans and such. With NYSRPA v. Bruen and Heller in view . Wouldn't this IP17 be considered unconstitutional at that point?

 

[_Will_]

My understanding is that any magazine over 10 rounds must be registered with the police. After that, it cannot be inherited or sold, except out of state.

I read the IP17 bill a few times and did not find this. There's all kinds of other goodies in there too. Magazine stamping after the effective date. Permit to purchase $50 with a full on course, live fire demonstration and even putting the firearm in a safe lol

 

[_Will_]

My question.. If SCOTUS just told CA, HI, NY, NJ and others to retry their lawsuits concerning AWB, mag bans and such. With NYSRPA v. Bruen and Heller in view . Wouldn't this IP17 be considered unconstitutional at that point?

Justice Thomas wrote: "To justify a firearm regulation the government must demonstrate that the regulation is consistent with the Nation's historical tradition of firearm regulation.".


"Firearm permits" were never part of historical tradition.

 

[AshWilliams]

View attachment 1232740

Ah, "The Treasure of Sierra Madre"!

 

[oregonferret]

Ah, "The Treasure of Sierra Madre"!

Sooner or later. People are going to Stop giving a F-ck what the " Law " say's.
And just do what they want.



Do they still call you Bruce or are you a imposter?

 

[Member 53328]

Sooner or later. People are going to Stop giving a F-ck what the " Law " say's.
And just do what they want.

View attachment 1232772

Yea. We are there.

 

[tkdguy]

Justice Thomas wrote: "To justify a firearm regulation the government must demonstrate that the regulation is consistent with the Nation's historical tradition of firearm regulation.".


"Firearm permits" were never part of historical tradition.

There was the 1994 Crime Bill that limited 10 round magazines; would that fit the historical precedent criteria? The Crime bill did not regulate AR 15 ?

 

[tkdguy]

Looks like if IP 17 goes forward that action would be ripe for a mega law suit; and then, against whom?

 

[jayR]

I'm sure the CCP approves

 

[Nunchuks]

I read the IP17 bill a few times and did not find this. There's all kinds of other goodies in there too. Magazine stamping after the effective date. Permit to purchase $50 with a full on course, live fire demonstration and even putting the firearm in a safe lol

My bad, I didn't find that on a reread. I posted the pdf link so nothing could be misconstrued. Section 11.5 on magazine posseession seems contradictory to Section 11.1 and 2. 1 and 2 say you can't own, but then 5 seems to indicate you can, but only at home, at a range or a gundealer's. Is it like the 94 AR ban where previous weapons were grandfathered in? (Pages 11 and 12)

 

[nehalemguy]

Sooner or later. People are going to Stop giving a F-ck what the " Law " say's.
And just do what they want....

 

[tkdguy]

This sounds like IP 17 should be an easy beat in court.

 

[_Will_]

My bad, I didn't find that on a reread. I posted the pdf link so nothing could be misconstrued. Section 11.5 on magazine posseession seems contradictory to Section 11.1 and 2. 1 and 2 say you can't own, but then 5 seems to indicate you can, but only at home, at a range or a gundealer's. Is it like the 94 AR ban where previous weapons were grandfathered in? (Pages 11 and 12)

The rest of IP17 is horribly written also. This is the section dealing with magazine possession and usage.

" shooting gallery" are they British?? Never heard that term used before. They must be Redcoats..

As of the effective date of this 2022 Act, it shall be an affirmative defense, as provided in ORS 166.055, to the unlawful
possession, use and transfer of a large-capacity magazine in this state by any person, provided that:
(a) The large-capacity magazine was owned by the person before the effective date of this 2022 Act and maintained in the
person's control or possession; or
(b) The possession of a large-capacity magazine was obtained by a person who, on or after the effective date of this
section, acquired possession of the large-capacity magazine by operation of law upon the death of a former owner who
was in legal possession of the large-capacity magazine; and
(c) In addition to either (a) or (b) of this subsection the owner has not maintained the large-capacity magazine in a
manner other than:
(A) On property owned or immediately controlled by the registered owner;
(B) On the premises of a gun dealer or gunsmith licensed under 18 U.S.C. 923 for the purpose of lawful service or repair;
(C) While engaging in the legal use of the large-capacity magazine, at a public or private shooting range or shooting gallery
or for recreational activities such as hunting, to the extent permitted under state law; or
(D) While participating in firearms competition or exhibition, display or educational project about firearms sponsored,
conducted by, approved or under the auspices of a law enforcement agency or a national or state-recognized entity that
fosters proficiency in firearms use or promotes firearms education; and
(E) While transporting any large-capacity magazines in a vehicle to one of the locations authorized in paragraphs (c)(A) to
(D) of this subsection, the large-capacity magazine is not inserted into the firearm and is locked in a separate container.
(d) The person has permanently and voluntarily relinquished the large-capacity magazine to law enforcement or to a
buyback or turn-in program approved by law enforcement, prior to commencement of prosecution by arrest, citation or a
formal charge.
(6) Unlawful manufacture, importation, possession, use, purchase, sale or otherwise transferring of a large-capacity
magazine is a class A misdemeanor

 

[Stomper]

Not if they are challenged. It's been done before.

112,000 is the required amount this year to get a statute initiative on the ballot. On average most petitioners want to turn in an extra 15-20% more than the required amount to compensate for invalid signatures -- Of which there can be expected to be a natural occurring amount.

Some initiatives in the past that were initially approved by the OR SoS were later found to have as many as 35% invalid signatures upon further audit.

If LEVO turns in only 112,020(to be exact) on the deadline of July 8th. That won't be enough.

Stalin said it best… "the only thing that matters in an election is who counts the votes."

This applies to this situation, because what do you want to bet that signature petition will have the most valid first-time signatures ever recorded in Oregon ballot measure history.

They WANT this to happen, because it takes the "heat"' off them during re-election time.

 

[_Will_]

I was not sure when this would go into effect. I really don't want to go and support this infringement but assuming it passes, do we know when they intend to make it so you have to have a permit to purchase a firearm. Like I have said, I likely will only be purchasing one more before I leave the state. And it is an smg I am waiting on a tax stamp for. Again, not sure how long until the wife and I can move.

I am also curious if we will likely get an injunction until someone can get this labeled as the unconstitutional bs it is.

In addition to all of the above. They are mandating " Firearm Training". They fail to realize the massive backlog that will create. Who will host it? The State of Oregon or Community College, private institutions? Then ontop of this, we have to pay out of pocket for this training every 5 years.

 

[AshWilliams]

Bend over OR. It's coming like a freight train.

 

[Aero Denezol]

How are they going to enforce a magazine registry without serializing magazines, some of which may be collectible, and who is going to pay for maintaining the registry and who has oversight to prevent possible abuses?

They are trying to blame our community for the revenge fantasies of troubled young men. Instead of finding ways to help kids who are struggling while the problem is still upstream.

This is nothing more than a steppingstone to an AWB. Shame on you Knudsen, you glory seeking Pharisee conman. For every veteran and cop you find who supports you I can find 10 who don't agree with you. Good luck with your pecan pie and coffee speeches. Those same people signing your petition are going to tear your church down brick by brick. The shame is you're too stupid to see it.

 

[WAYNO]

Separation of church and state? Maybe we should petition to eliminate their tax free status.

 

[Stomper]

In addition to all of the above. They are mandating " Firearm Training". They fail to realize the massive backlog that will create. Who will host it? The State of Oregon or Community College, private institutions? Then ontop of this, we have to pay out of pocket for this training every 5 years.

I have my Army 201-file that's about 6" thick with training records (including annual refresher training courses) for just about every small arm the Army had in the inventory at the time.


Will THAT suffice to prove I'm qualified to safely shoot you in the face if you need shot?






The F-ing meatheads.