Oregon Measure 114 January 3rd 2023

[GrayGoose]

Is there any evidence of a criminal shooter acquiring a firearm using the 3 day release rule?

I'll bet that their next mass shooting patsy will have received his firearm this way.

 

[MatthewDB]

You should read up on the timeline of the event before you hang your hat on it.

-E-

I posted earlier with quite a bit of confidence that it wasn't a 3 day rule release. Now I'm seeing conflicting reporting in different media. I'm not longer certain what to believe.

Other than the fact that the state of Oregon is stomping on the rights of the law abiding citizens and it is pissing me off.

 

[Robert Hood]

Well, regardless of how it came about, this is what it's called and that's what is on the table.
Now we can only watch what happens and support the groups that are in the fight.
GOA, 2af, NAGR, OSSA, AFA, and yes I even renewed with the NRA.
I am sure there are more, and I try to support as many as I can afford.
Of those that I see are actually fighting for the 2A.

 

[arakboss]

The State seems to be mum on their next move?

 

[MichaelH]

The State seems to be mum on their next move?

I don't think they have a case till they have the complete permit system up and running in all counties.

 

[xiSHARPSHOOTix]

I don't think they have a case till they have the complete permit system up and running in all counties.

Hopefully most of those counties refuse to comply with creating a permit system due to "lack of funding" and being unconstitutional. Would really put a chokehold on the State.

 

[solv3nt]

Hopefully most of those counties refuse to comply with creating a permit system due to "lack of funding" and being unconstitutional. Would really put a chokehold on the State.

Not really, it would just completely halt sales in that county.

 

[fmvolume86]

They shouldn't have a case NOW the measure is asking for mulitple things when the law only allows for one issue per measure.

 

[Yarome]

Hopefully most of those counties refuse to comply with creating a permit system due to "lack of funding" and being unconstitutional. Would really put a chokehold on the State.

Actually, there has been some scuttlebutt through the rumor mills of some sheriff's talking amongst themselves of possibly taking that approach in an effot to side rail the state from having a fully functional system in place... and therefore... unable to present it for Judge Raschio's review of it's constitutionality. Supposedly, they have been instructed to use currently available local funds to retain the personnel to admin the permits for their counties... and are refusing to do so... until funds are provided by the state (since its state mandated the state must pay). It may indeed derail the process until the legislature meets to provide the necessary funding.

Just speculations and rumors from "unnamed sources" within a couple sheriffs offices, but interesting nonetheless.

No hearing, no lift of the injunction. Of course, even if its presented there is still a likelihood it may be ruled unconstitutional and thrown out, anyway.

 

[Yarome]

An afterthought, but it just kind of hit me to wonder if Judge Raschio didn't already give us a little forshadowing of his mindset and possible things to come. In his ruling on the 3day safeguard he stated that he would reconsider severability of the safeguard if the permit provision was found unconstitutional.

Dare we hope thata's kind of his plan? The permit law is already out the door and he's setting the framework to revisit the 3 day down the road(??) Makes a person wonder... but just as likely to be absolutely meaningless and he was just dotting his "i's" for the record.

Fun to wish and think about though.

 

[Wombat of Doom]

Any new words on the mag ban?

 

[Yarome]

Any new words on the mag ban?

Not since the last time someone asked. 114 in it's entirety is still stayed with no future court dates currently scheduled.

 

[PiratePast40]

An afterthought, but it just kind of hit me to wonder if Judge Raschio didn't already give us a little forshadowing of his mindset and possible things to come. In his ruling on the 3day safeguard he stated that he would reconsider severability of the safeguard if the permit provision was found unconstitutional.

Dare we hope thata's kind of his plan? The permit law is already out the door and he's setting the framework to revisit the 3 day down the road(??) Makes a person wonder... but just as likely to be absolutely meaningless and he was just dotting his "i's" for the record.

Fun to wish and think about though.

All it takes is for LEVO to submit a few changes in sentence structure and we're right back where we were with delays. Bills will be submitted next week and special attention will be given to 114 because of the TRO's. They could even petition the court to dissolve the severability issue before the permitting process is in place if the judiciary committee passes the revision to the house. They could easily introduce the changes in the federal status meeting toward the end of February.

 

[Yarome]

All it takes is for LEVO to submit a few changes in sentence structure and we're right back where we were with delays. Bills will be submitted next week and special attention will be given to 114 because of the TRO's. They could even petition the court to dissolve the severability issue before the permitting process is in place if the judiciary committee passes the revision to the house. They could easily introduce the changes in the federal status meeting toward the end of February.

Very true. Then have another hearing and judicate it under strict scrutiny on constitutionality, maintaining the status quo until the full hearing takes place (mantain the injunction)... since that worked to well for NY... and the states burden to prove greater harm if the injunction is not lifted. Judge Raschio already threw out the state provided stats of how it decreases violent crime as indeterminate hogwash.

We'll see how it plays.

 

[peteNW503]

Picked up a lower receiver today get this! my name on my license is slightly different then my CHL because my last name is so long it is abbreviated on my license and the full name is on my CHL. Well they ran my License and it put me at 14k. In the que. So I leave I get a called back 5 minutes later they approved it after they resubmitted it using my full name. Thankfully my FFL knows me like that and thought it was odd that I didn't get an instant so he resubmitted using the full name on my CHL. This has happened before where they say the CHL and you license are the Same they aren't! Just run the CHL and avoid the problem I had!

 

[solv3nt]

Picked up a lower receiver today get this! my name on my license is slightly different then my CHL because my last name is so long it is abbreviated on my license and the full name is on my CHL. Well they ran my License and it put me at 14k. In the que. So I leave I get a called back 5 minutes later they approved it after they resubmitted it using my full name. Thankfully my FFL knows me like that and thought it was odd that I didn't get an instant so he resubmitted using the full name on my CHL. This has happened before where they say the CHL and you license are the Same they aren't! Just run the CHL and avoid the problem I had!

Interesting, I'm opposite, my ODL is my middle initial and my CHL is my full middle. With the middle initial, I get the instant.

 

[Danall]

Glad to know something different, and not gonna peruse the statute since I'm not an FFL. Hence the qualifiers "think" instead of "know" and "potential" instead of "is". I do appreciate the knowledge sharing.

Interestingly, if one can show the state police's inability to process checks is in bad faith, they could be liable.

Do you know if the same immunity applies under Federal law?

The closest I've seen under fed laws is this:
from 18 US Code 922 Unlawful acts

(6) Neither a local government nor an employee of the Federal Government or of any State or local government, responsible for providing information to the national instant criminal background check system shall be liable in an action at law for damages—
(A)
for failure to prevent the sale or transfer of a firearm to a person whose receipt or possession of the firearm is unlawful under this section; or
(B)
for preventing such a sale or transfer to a person who may lawfully receive or possess a firearm.

Item B indicates that preventing a lawful transfer/sale could be excluded from liability.

 

[FastSmitty]

Picked up a lower receiver today get this! my name on my license is slightly different then my CHL because my last name is so long it is abbreviated on my license and the full name is on my CHL. Well they ran my License and it put me at 14k. In the que. So I leave I get a called back 5 minutes later they approved it after they resubmitted it using my full name. Thankfully my FFL knows me like that and thought it was odd that I didn't get an instant so he resubmitted using the full name on my CHL. This has happened before where they say the CHL and you license are the Same they aren't! Just run the CHL and avoid the problem I had!

Dang, bro, if that picture is you in your photo, you look like this Filipino Navy cat I knew once. Also, how do you like your 19x, and what lower receivers did you grab?

The closest I've seen under fed laws is this:
from 18 US Code 922 Unlawful acts

Item B indicates that preventing a lawful transfer/sale could be excluded from liability.

Wonder how long it will take until we see that trickle down? I'm waiting for the commercials to start coming on the TV! "HAVE YOU SUFFERED MENTALLY OR PHYSICALLY FROM MEASURE 114!!!" "CALL NOW TO JOIN THIS CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT!!!!"

 

[peteNW503]

Dang, bro, if that picture is you in your photo, you look like this Filipino Navy cat I knew once. Also, how do you like your 19x, and what lower receivers did you grab?


Wonder how long it will take until we see that trickle down? I'm waiting for the commercials to start coming on the TV! "HAVE YOU SUFFERED MENTALLY OR PHYSICALLY FROM MEASURE 114!!!" "CALL NOW TO JOIN THIS CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT!!!!"

Close Puerto Rican lmao I really like the 19x except for the lanyard loop and I picked up a JAKL lower

 

[Jay Walk]

Family of Six murdered in California yesterday by Border crosser Cartel Thugs.

They shot a ten month old in the head, lucky that the gun was a ten rounder and carried the mandatory firearm insurance or this could have been much worse.