Magazines: Proof of date purchased.

[Yarome]

As stated by many... newspapers, photos, engraving... it can all be done post fact and not definitive "proof" of anything. You would be required to enter a sworn statement that they are accurate and authentic. That is the "proof" part as a sworn statement is a legal mechanism recognized by the courts as "evidence".

Remember when your word was your bond and not everyone was willing to impune their honor by providing false statements? The courts where founded on that and must still abide by it... unless proven false... for which you would face legal charges and penalty for making a false statement under oath.

By providing more info than is required it "can" open up more avenues for a prosecutor to prove your statement false or to at least cast doubt. Find one mag you forgot to engrave... the counts don't match exactly because you threw out a problem child, botched a mag mod, or gave some away... find just one hole in your provided "proof" and all the rest becomes suspect.

Why do it when all that is required is your swore statement, anyway. "I aquired every one of them pre ban". Your statement is "proof" accepted by the courts and it then falls to the prosecutor to prove your statment false with nothing physical to debate, cast doubt or unravel. IE., "the defendant is computer savy and altering metadata is well within his/her ability. He/she participated in a forum thread directly related to providing mag ownership proof where altering metadata was discussed."

See where that's going?

KISS

Don't sweat it. Don't provide anything more than is required by law that may potentially shoot yourself in the weewee.

 

[Jay Walk]

Picture of your Buddies receipt.

 

[AshWilliams]

As stated by many... newspapers, photos, engraving... it can all be done post fact and not definitive "proof" of anything. You would be required to enter a sworn statement that they are accurate and authentic. That is the "proof" part as a sworn statement is a legal mechanism recognized by the courts as "evidence".

Remember when your word was your bond and not everyone was willing to impune their honor by providing false statements? The courts where founded on that and must still abide by it... unless proven false... for which you would face legal charges and penalty for making a false statement under oath.

By providing more info than is required it "can" open up more avenues for a prosecutor to prove your statement false or to at least cast doubt. Find one mag you forgot to engrave... the counts don't match exactly because you threw out a problem child, botched a mag mod, or gave some away... find just one hole in your provided "proof" and all the rest becomes suspect.

Why do it when all that is required is your swore statement, anyway. "I aquired every one of them pre ban". Your statement is "proof" accepted by the courts and it then falls to the prosecutor to prove your statment false with nothing physical to debate, cast doubt or unravel. IE., "the defendant is computer savy and altering metadata is well within his/her ability. He/she participated in a forum thread directly related to providing mag ownership proof where altering metadata was discussed."

See where that's going?

KISS

Don't sweat it. Don't provide anything more than is required by law that may potentially shoot yourself in the weewee.

"Remember when your word was your bond and not everyone was willing to impune their honor by providing false statements? The courts where founded on that and must still abide by it... unless proven false... for which you would face legal charges and penalty for making a false statement under oath."

What world are you living in? Money shall dictate the law. Constitution? Wtf is that?

Oregon is now under the most unconstitutional gun laws in the nation. Prove me wrong.

 

[dinky450]

How does the photo prove that the mags in the picture are the same mags that you claim to have purchased? What is unique or identifies them as the mags you claim them to be?

Well I am sure most of us have totes full of mags sooo... how do they prove you bought more?

"Oh I had totes full of mags why would I buy more?"

 

[Yarome]

"Oh I had totes full of mags why would I buy more?"

If I was LE or a judge I would 100% buy that as a defense.

"Well... he ain't lyin... why, indeed!"

 

[dinky450]

If I was LE or a judge I would 100% buy that as a defense.

"Well... he ain't lyin... why, indeed!"

One picture with a time stamp when created is worth a 1000s words..... few totes more in the cabinet lol

 

[SonicBlue03]

The Lincoln County Sheriff's office.

They can eat a d**k. Burden of proof is on them, not me.

 

[Yarome]

One picture with a time stamp when created is worth a 1000s words..... few totes more in the cabinet lol

View attachment 1316339

All that says is that you have a picture of a bunch of mags. Nothing there says they are yours, that they were legally obtained (vs. stolen), when or from were they were purchased... or that the one that was in your firearm at the time of your arrest is pictured.

Exif editor apps are a dime a dozen, free, and perfectly legal to obtain and use.

Just sayin.... Digital pictures these days are only worth the 1000 words someone wants them to say. Long gone are the days when printed pictures with verifiable negative exposures could be taken as "proof positive".

Posting them to a 3rd party forum with an independant system time stamp probably helps to show it previously existed prior to the ban and remains unchanged. I'll give you that! Otherwise the forum owner pulls a consipiracy to conceal a crime charge.... right?

Still doesn't prove the one in your firearm was in that photo though.

 

[Member 53328]

Easy to say on an internet forum. Much less so when you're hauled into court on a class A misdemeanor.

Truth.

You do you. I'll do me.

 

[dinky450]

All that says is that you have a picture of a bunch of mags. Nothing there says they are yours, that they were legally obtained (vs. stolen), when or from were they were purchased... or that the one that was in your firearm at the time of your arrest is pictured.

Exif editor apps are a dime a dozen, free, and perfectly legal to obtain and use.

Just sayin.... Digital pictures these days are only worth the 1000 words someone wants them to say. Long gone are the days when printed pictures with verifiable negative exposures could be taken as "proof positive".

True to a point until you are in court and you have to bring up what you actually own to go with those mags lol. As well I have a pretty good digital trail just have to log into a few gun sites. I am not worried about it as they will have to prove you bought more. We still somewhat have constitutional right on due process which any good lawyer will point out it would Trump any silly measure.

 

[fmvolume86]

I will own my magazines today , tomorrow , and long after any 114 is in place..... and I'll acquire more

 

[deadeye]

Simple answer really and not sure why I didn't post it earlier........ I self-identify as a law enforcement agent therefore I am not subject to this law.

 

[dinky450]

Simple answer really and not sure why I didn't post it earlier........ I self-identify as a law enforcement agent therefore I am not subject to this law.

Only on duty even off duty officers can't have mags of that nature

 

[Yarome]

Simple answer really and not sure why I didn't post it earlier........ I self-identify as a law enforcement agent therefore I am not subject to this law.

Jokes on you!! LEO's are not exempt from the new law. Only while on duty while executing their official duties. Once they punch out for the day.... they're as bubblegummed as we all are.

Or should I say.. "YOU are,, ossifer deadeye".

(I've known a few ossifer spray and pray's, but never a deadeye before.)

 

[deadeye]

Jokes on you!! LEO's are not exempt from the new law. Only while on duty while executing their official duties. Once they punch out for the day.... they're as bubblegummed as we all are.

Or should I say.. "YOU are,, ossifer deadeye".

(I've known a few ossifer spray and pray's, but never a deadeye before.)

So if I identify as a leo then I can also identify as being on duty 24/7 as needed.

OK then we can use the hunting/ fishing angle same as carrying concealed while going to or from, just need to keep that license up to date. Just remember that you are hunting coyotes, opossum, nutria or other varmints.


seriously though I DGAF I will just carry on the same way i do now.

 

[Nosferatu]

This was the attitude that was prevalent during 114 signature gathering. Then it went on the ballot. Then it got passed.

Here we are again with folks "not worried".

Given that I don't reside there and have no plans of ever soiling the bottom or my boots with that state, I can say with absolute confidence that I'm not worried.

 

[Old Dog]

Way late to this party.

Oregon residents, let's all just calm the F down.

We went through this up here already in Washington.

It's on the state for the burden of proof as far as when you purchased your magazines.

Eleven frickin' pages? What's up with you guys, anyway? Keep calm, and carry on...

 

[wltjd221]

I just took photo of most of my magazines and posted social media, and not planning to edit at all as one way of leaving proof that i had them before Dec 2022

 

[GripItAndRipIt]

My magazines identify as organic carrots. 100% legal!

 

[GripItAndRipIt]

Way late to this party.

Oregon residents, let's all just calm the F down.

We went through this up here already in Washington.

It's on the state for the burden of proof as far as when you purchased your magazines.

Eleven frickin' pages? What's up with you guys, anyway? Keep calm, and carry on...

Normally I would agree with you as a fan of rational, logical discourse. However, recently we have seen our own institutions weaponized against us and we have been identified as "the enemy." We -- the great majority of law-abiding citizens who just want to be mostly left alone -- are now called "terrorists" while in the greatest twist of irony, violent radicals burn cities and it's "mostly peaceful protest."

A man in Bend is convicted of murder 2 for using his firearm to lawfully defend himself from a brutal assault which left him with a cracked skull. Yet news outlets around the world gleefully produce headlines like "White bullet factory worker shoots black man for complimenting his girlfriend." Delivered with a straight face. Without irony.

Face it, they HATE us. So ideas that have been the foundation of our way of life for two-and-a-half centuries such as the presumption of innocence, burden of proof, habeas corpus? Only if you don't engage in wrongthink. We have long ago traded the rule of law for the rule of men.

I think we still have Jan. 6 detainees incarcerated who have still never been charged with any crime.

So yeah, in an environment where guns and gun owners are despised and ridiculed, and our Constitution used as a urinal, the burden of proof is whatever they say it is.