Oregon Measure 114 litigation

[nammac]

Of course they would pick a Communist holiday.

Well that's appropriate, Oregon becomes a communist state on a communist holiday…

 

[PiratePast40]

During a recent OFF Alert, Kevin pointed out what was going on with M114. We have a chance to make suggestions to OSP on the permit process procedure. I realize that a middle finger salute is probaby the most appropriate, but there might be some worthwhile suggestions. One that comes to mind is that if the permit background check takes more than 24 hours, it will result in an automatic approval. I'm not suggesting that we provide our own ropes for them to hang us, but keep in mind they are using the Firearm INSTANT Check System (FICS). Below is the excerpt from that alert with links to the OSP website for your suggestions.

"As you know, Measure 114 is on hold due to an injunction issued out of Harney County. A full trial is expected there in September. However, everything could change based on what actions the Legislature takes.

In the meantime, the Oregon State Police are accepting your "suggestions" on how best to implement a "permit to purchase" policy that we all know will be every bit as chaotic and unworkable as their current "instant background check" system is.

Comments can be emailed to [email protected] or mailed to:

Oregon State Police
Attn: Permit to Purchase Rulemaking
3565 Trelstad Ave. SE
Salem, OR 97317

You can offer your "suggestions" until May 22."

More information here https://www.oregonfirearms.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Rulemaking-Notice_SOS-Filed_4-17-23-1.pdf

 

[tkdguy]

Maybe people should be required to show proof of a gun safety course completion only? Or CHL?

 

[Librarian]

Some lawsuit updates today:

OFF v Brown/Kotek, third amended complaint, https://t.co/rg0H9Sn8vz

First amended complaint in Azzopardi, https://t.co/ltN27vGqhA

 

[Mono1]

Some lawsuit updates today:

OFF v Brown/Kotek, third amended complaint, https://t.co/rg0H9Sn8vz

First amended complaint in Azzopardi, https://t.co/ltN27vGqhA

Thanks for the update @Librarian good stuff!

 

[Librarian]

12 May 2023 State moves for summary judgement in Federal case

DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AGAINST PLAINTIFFS' FACIAL CHALLENGES TO IMPLEMENTATION OF MEASURE 114 AND MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFFS' AS-APPLIED CHALLENGES TO IMPLEMENTATION OF MEASURE 114

https://assets.nationbuilder.com/fi...1683943907/OFF_v_Kotek_117_MSJ.pdf?1683943907

 

[Yarome]

12 May 2023 State moves for summary judgement in Federal case

https://assets.nationbuilder.com/fi...1683943907/OFF_v_Kotek_117_MSJ.pdf?1683943907

Some pretty ridiculous arguments in there that really don't lend toward a summary judgement. Some flat out falsehoods as well. It seems to boil down to, Well... "the state hasn't hurt anyone yet so you should dismiss all their claims as unfounded." "Even if the state does anyone harm they can always sue the state in court to appeal the decision or seek reoperations."

The FBI fingerprint check. Basically arguing that if the FBI won't do it they are only required to report back the results of the check, so, if the result is, "the FBI refused to do it", then that's what will be reported to the reviewing agent. IOW, "no harm no foul".

They're also still trying to make it sound like the permits are shall issue, but even in the motion it clearly states that granting discretion is with the issuing official. Basically... admitting that there is latitude for what they call a "rogue official" to discriminate (errrmm.. you mean "may issue"??), but then go back to, "but they can always take the state to court and petition for remedy."

Same old nonsense and sure doesn't sound like a slam dunk for a summary judgement. Then again... they have innerglut in their pocket... so nothing would surprise me.

 

[The Heretic]

They're also still trying to make it sound like the permits are shall issue, but even in the motion it clearly states that granting discretion is with the issuing official. Basically... admitting that there is latitude for what they call a "rogue official" to discriminate (errrmm.. you mean "may issue"??), but then go back to, "but they can always take the state to court and petition for remedy."

Multnomah county sheriff?

 

[Librarian]

May 13 -- Aaaaand, the complement, https://assets.nationbuilder.com/fi...1683981940/OFF_v_Kotek_165_MSJ.pdf?1683981940

PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, TRIAL BRIEF

 

[Yarome]

Multnomah county sheriff?

I rest my case, your Honor.

 

[Richo877]

During a recent OFF Alert, Kevin pointed out what was going on with M114. We have a chance to make suggestions to OSP on the permit process procedure. I realize that a middle finger salute is probaby the most appropriate, but there might be some worthwhile suggestions. One that comes to mind is that if the permit background check takes more than 24 hours, it will result in an automatic approval. I'm not suggesting that we provide our own ropes for them to hang us, but keep in mind they are using the Firearm INSTANT Check System (FICS). Below is the excerpt from that alert with links to the OSP website for your suggestions.

"As you know, Measure 114 is on hold due to an injunction issued out of Harney County. A full trial is expected there in September. However, everything could change based on what actions the Legislature takes.

In the meantime, the Oregon State Police are accepting your "suggestions" on how best to implement a "permit to purchase" policy that we all know will be every bit as chaotic and unworkable as their current "instant background check" system is.

Comments can be emailed to [email protected] or mailed to:

Oregon State Police
Attn: Permit to Purchase Rulemaking
3565 Trelstad Ave. SE
Salem, OR 97317

You can offer your "suggestions" until May 22."

More information here https://www.oregonfirearms.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Rulemaking-Notice_SOS-Filed_4-17-23-1.pdf

CHL should provide as evidence that a holder has completed all requirements to purchase a firearm, and possession of such license should act as a "permit to purchase"

 

[Yarome]

CHL should provide as evidence that a holder has completed all requirements to purchase a firearm, and possession of such license should act as a "permit to purchase"

... add active and retired military, LE, certified firearms instructor, possessing a USA security guard license... to name a few.

 

[PiratePast40]

CHL should provide as evidence that a holder has completed all requirements to purchase a firearm, and possession of such license should act as a "permit to purchase"

It does as long as it includes the same training requirements of the permit to purchase. Suicide awareness and current laws are the main ones.

 

[TTSX]

I'm confused about which bills specifically have the permit scheme in them and when it would be implemented if passed? There is a purchase I'd like to make but it has a 4 month lead time and I'm not terribly comfortable making that commitment without more knowledge. I'd be happy to do the reading if I can be pointed in the correct direction

 

[PiratePast40]

I'm confused about which bills specifically have the permit scheme in them and when it would be implemented if passed? There is a purchase I'd like to make but it has a 4 month lead time and I'm not terribly comfortable making that commitment without more knowledge. I'd be happy to do the reading if I can be pointed in the correct direction

The permit to purchase doesn't go into effect until 1 July next year. It's implemented by SB348. HB2005 talks about it with the 3 day hold after approval. Same with HB393. Keep in mind, standard capacity mag ban goes into effect immediately when 348 passes. If greater than 10 rounds in your concealed carry piece, you join most of us in being a criminal.

 

[E4mafia]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1661099049435406345

The above image is taken from page 12 of the plaintiff's reply in response for summary judgement.

https://assets.nationbuilder.com/firearmspolicycoalition/pages/6657/attachments/original/1684858493/OFF_v_Kotek_162_MSJ_Reply.pdf?1684858493

 

[The Heretic]

Ok, so I am a retired software engineer with 30+ years experience.

MS Excel is a spreadsheet app. As such, it has some very limited capability to create/work with an Access database. It is not itself a database or a RDBMS (Relational Database Management System). Its DB capabilities are very limited. To use it (or Access for that matter) for DB purposes is an ad-hoc temporary solution and absolutely Amateur Hour.

If I suggested to any halfway decent s/w dev team and suggested using Excel/Access I would be laughed at. This is the kind of thing that a manager (or CEO) who knows nothing about databases would suggest. If they did know anything, this an entirely specious suggestion - especially for the application they are thinking of.

Where do they get this bullbubblegum??

 

[titsonritz]

Maybe people should be required to show proof of a gun safety course completion only? Or CHL?

Maybe people requiring such blatantly unconstitutional bullsh!t should FOAD.

 

[E4mafia]

https://assets.nationbuilder.com/firearmspolicycoalition/pages/6657/attachments/original/1685140302/OFF_v_Kotek_167_Order.pdf?1685140302

https://twitter.com/x/status/1662225927965749248

 

[Ura-Ki]

https://assets.nationbuilder.com/firearmspolicycoalition/pages/6657/attachments/original/1685140302/OFF_v_Kotek_167_Order.pdf?1685140302

https://twitter.com/x/status/1662225927965749248

So, our corrupt Fed Judge wants the limelight of full trial, when we all know she will side with the State in violating our rights, and thusly, delay this all as it then goes to the 9th and they drag their feet on it even more!

VOTE PEOPLE, DO YOUR CIVIC PHUCKING DUTY AND VOTE, THIS ONLY SLIPPED THROUGH BY A FEW VOTES!
It's you arseoles who didn't vote ( Or Worse, voter this through) that have rammed this down all our throats and are now costing us millions to fight the state to end this!