Oregon Measure 114 litigation

[CamoDeafie]

The fact that no one at the state level can do that is a travesty in and of itself, to say nothing of actually attempting to enforce the law in its current state (if that is indeed their plans).

Sounds just like the ATF when it came to the whole "Length of Pull" thing in Ohio around 2018ish? And the US Fed government relating to the ACA (coughs, "we have to pass it to see whats in it" coughs) ; and a lot of State and Federal laws

Edit, 2018 actually

ATF Suffers Rare Court Loss in Ohio Unregistered 'Short Barrel Rifle' Prosecution - The Truth About Guns

An Ohio Marine vet was prosecuted for possessing an unregistered short barrel rifle by the ATF. But the .gov didn't have its legal ducks a row. What a shame.

www.thetruthaboutguns.com

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

Yeah, this is where it gets confusing (and why the state has a responsibility to clear this all up for FFLs)

I agree with you, but I was curious whose responsibility everything was, and *from what I can tell* the sole responsibility for understanding and complying with all Federal, State and Local laws falls squarely on the FFL holder, so yeah, they should clear it up, but legally I don't think they have a responsibility to, which is all kinds of wrong!

 

[lucusloc]

I agree with you, but I was curious whose responsibility everything was, and *from what I can tell* the sole responsibility for understanding and complying with all Federal, State and Local laws falls squarely on the FFL holder, so yeah, they should clear it up, but legally I don't think they have a responsibility to, which is all kinds of wrong!

Yep, the ATF has a principle of providing advice and guidance when asked, but they are explicit that anything you get from them is not legal advice (which is all kinds of BS given that they are also the agency tasked with enforcement and prosecution of those laws. If they say they are not going to go after you for something I damn well expect them to keep to that, even though they sometimes don't). Oregon state does not abide by the same principles it seems, even as far as providing guidance and advice, and 100% leave the FFLs hanging even when explicitly asked what the state's intentions are regarding enforcement. "figure it out yourself, if you get it wrong we will arrest you" is the implicit answer my FFLs seem to be getting. I can understand how it would be difficult to operate under those conditions.

 

[PiratePast40]

The state has no obligation to inform you personally of the status of ;litigation or pending legislation. All the information is easily obtainable from multiple sources, both private and published by the state.

You guys complain about lack of information but failed to mention what happened yesterday. Do you even hear yourselves?

 

[TTSX]

The state has no obligation to inform you personally of the status of ;litigation or pending legislation. All the information is easily obtainable from multiple sources, both private and published by the state.

You guys complain about lack of information but failed to mention what happened yesterday. Do you even hear yourselves?

What happened yesterday? Apparently nobody but you knows?

 

[PiratePast40]

What happened yesterday? Apparently nobody but you knows?

At least subscribe to the OFF alerts. Over and over again, I've posted links to groups that are tracking all of this.

I don't know how people can say they are against any of these bills when they don't bother to see what's going on. Have you actually submitted testimony or, gasp, actually gone to the hearings and testified in person?

Come on guys, we're in the final stages of the legislative session.

 

[TTSX]

At least subscribe to the OFF alerts. Over and over again, I've posted links to groups that are tracking all of this.

I don't know how people can say they are against any of these bills when they don't bother to see what's going on. Have you actually submitted testimony or, gasp, actually gone to the hearings and testified in person?

Come on guys, we're in the final stages of the legislative session.

Thanks for the info. That was helpful

 

[CamoDeafie]

HB3075 2025 Regular Session - Oregon Legislative Information System

olis.oregonlegislature.gov

So, yesterday was a "work session", and today it's scheduled for another "work session" in the House Judiciary Committee, and not yet on House floor for voting on?

 

[CamoDeafie]

I see that the -2 proposed amendments increases fees from $65 to $150, and background check portion of the fee reads not to exceed $48.

Edit. They're really doubling down on preventing the poors and young people who want to be first time gun owners from being able to afford the permit on top of whatever it may cost for the guns they want.

 

[MrJoshuaYoder]

Simply put:

HB3075 seeks to prevent the people from acquiring arms, by infringing with permitting, and other restrictions.

HB3076 seeks to prevent gun dealers from being in business to sell guns.

A thread that has more detailed information and links to all the pending firearms related legislation:

www.northwestfirearms.com/threads/2025-83rd-oregon-legislative-assembly-firearm-proposals-a-list.507646

 

[1775usmc]

Yea. I'm not subscribing to OFF. lol.

 

[Jcon268]

Yeah, this is where it gets confusing (and why the state has a responsibility to clear this all up for FFLs); there are two cases, one in the Federal Court which is on hold, and one in the Oregon Court of Appeals (which the Federal case is waiting on). And this is where I may be getting mixed up too. I thought the State level stay was (will be) fully rescinded, including the permitting portion of 114. But if that part is still stayed on the federal case the state rescission is effectively moot for that bit. But now I am not sure the state rescinded the whole thing, and they only rescinded the stay on the mag cap issue? Either way there ought to be some official source that can speak authoritatively on the status of the law and what will be expected of FFLs come the 14th. The fact that no one at the state level can do that is a travesty in and of itself, to say nothing of actually attempting to enforce the law in its current state (if that is indeed their plans).

It's all by design. They "the anti-gun state" don't want to catch themselves coming out with guidance because they'd see themselves as encouraging gun sales in some roundabout way. Their whole objective is to hamper gun sales as much as possible so they can feel like heroes. I'd hate to think they're staying silent to see if someone gets caught on a technicality but I wouldn't put that past them either...

 

[64MercurysRule]

FYI .......

 

[Pete F]

FYI .......

View attachment 2071957

Thanks to you and Tony.

 

[PiratePast40]

Yea. I'm not subscribing to OFF. lol.

What groups do you suggest? I've posted many but where do you go for information?

 

[Will_White]

What groups do you suggest? I've posted many but where do you go for information?

Here

 

[awags_86]

What groups do you suggest? I've posted many but where do you go for information?

It's typical Oregon behavior. Cut off your nose to spite your face - "this group, or candidate aligns with me, but I just don't like them so I will distance myself from them. Not support them at all. Then when my side loses I'll throw my hands up and wonder why"

 

[1775usmc]

What groups do you suggest? I've posted many but where do you go for information?

Well I do my own research…. Don't need to be spoon fed.

NWFA is a great reference/source. Even if it brings things to my attention that I can than research later. OFF may be a good resource but I can't stand them or how they present themselves personally.

Not telling others to avoid them. But I personally do.

 

[Unka-Boo]

Well I do my own research…. Don't need to be spoon fed.

NWFA is a great reference/source. Even if it brings things to my attention that I can than research later. OFF may be a good resource but I can't stand them or how they present themselves personally.

Not telling others to avoid them. But I personally do.

Same for me.....if Kevin presented better, he would get more traction. Frankly, he comes across as a bitter old doosh...I am subscribed and value the info he presents, but he really needs to work on his PR skills.

 

[1775usmc]

Same for me.....if Kevin presented better, he would get more traction. Frankly, he comes across as a bitter old doosh...I am subscribed and value the info he presents, but he really needs to work on his PR skills.

If he would just present the facts without all the childish name calling and fear mongering he would do much better. It's the equivalent of all the YouTube "Conservative legal" people. Or the way the left just screams names at people simply cause they disagree. I don't have the time or patience to listen to people who just scream names and point fingers. The minute that starts I walk away. I don't care if you're left or right. Pro gun or anti gun. If you can't just list your facts and lay out your point/view point and be an adult about it, leaving your emotions at the door I will disregard what you have to say and tune out.

If that's me "cutting" off my nose then so be it. I have a brain and can think for myself. I also live in America and have the freedom to do what I wish.