measure 114 passed, what's next?

[NoThankYou]

114 does say that, but by that same logic, a cop can walk to you and say "you stole that money that you have in your pocket, prove that you didn't do it", hence being quite questionable, the burden to prove that someone committed a crime is on the prosecution, is on that entity bringing the charge. As I said , I know 114 says the opposite hence being shaky from that angle as well.

With due respect, I think folks aren't aware that "affirmative defense" is NOT unconstitutional and is a cornerstone of American law.

114 makes magazines with capacity over 10 rounds illegal (outside of you home, the range, etc.). They carve out an exception of this law to those who bought these magazines before the declared date. So if you are arrested for possession of magazines of over 10 rounds, you need to mount an affirmative defense showing how you are an exception to this law.

Self defense is also an affirmative defense example. Killing someone is against the law. But the law carves out exceptions like self-defense. So if the prosecutor can show beyond a reasonable doubt that you shot someone, YOU must mount the affirmative defense of showing that it was self-defense (by predominance of evidence standard, which is more likely than not).

There are some interesting arguments about 114 on constitutional grounds, but not "affirmative defense." It's used throughout the law commonly.

 

[Soren]

Everything about 114 violates the U.S. Constitution, the Oregon Constitution and/or The Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1986.

The creators of 114 should be sued for deprivation of our Constitutional rights.
Title 42 U.S. Code § 1983 - Civil action for deprivation of rights.
Title 42 U.S. Code § 1985 - Conspiracy to interfere with civil rights
Title 42 U.S. Code § 1986 - Action for neglect to prevent
18 U.S. Code § 241 - Conspiracy against rights
18 U.S. Code § 242 - Deprivation of rights under color of law

 

[SixgunSymphony]

Everything about 114 violates the U.S. Constitution, the Oregon Constitution and/or The Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1986.

The creators of 114 should be sued for deprivation of our Constitutional rights.
Title 42 U.S. Code § 1983 - Civil action for deprivation of rights.
Title 42 U.S. Code § 1985 - Conspiracy to interfere with civil rights
Title 42 U.S. Code § 1986 - Action for neglect to prevent
18 U.S. Code § 241 - Conspiracy against rights
18 U.S. Code § 242 - Deprivation of rights under color of law

Democrats have been packing the courts for a long time.

 

[Konajay]

Curious if 114 permit requirements affects black powder rifle purchases. Can anyone verify?
Thanks in advance.

 

[OrPackrat]

Curious if 114 permit requirements affects black powder rifle purchases. Can anyone verify?
Thanks in advance.

Is black powder considered a firearm?

If its not, I'd consider carrying a blunderbuss....

 

[ilikegunspdx]

Curious if 114 permit requirements affects black powder rifle purchases. Can anyone verify?
Thanks in advance.

It doesn't. Has been shown several times in various threads.

 

[ilikegunspdx]

Is black powder considered a firearm?

If its not, I'd consider carrying a blunderbuss....

Not a firearm. Antique firearm. Relevant laws posted in several threads recently.

 

[nammac]

Time to invest in cap and ball revolvers…

 

[The Heretic]

If it is BP and muzzleloader - not a firearm with regards to 114 and most other laws regarding transfers.

BP cartridge guns are a different classification though. As far as I recall, C&R cartridge firearms, including BP, are considered firearms with regards to transfers of ownership?

 

[PDXbiker]

Time to invest in cap and ball revolvers…

Eventually you would need a BGC, permit, training class and safe storage requirement for buying and possessing that explosive black powder.

 

[nammac]

Eventually you would need a BGC, permit, training class and safe storage requirement for buying and possessing that explosive black powder.

Reference?

 

[PDXbiker]

Reference?

It's a joke.........

 

[SixgunSymphony]

Time to invest in cap and ball revolvers…

The Italian reproductions often need some honing to the lockwork to make them reliable. There is plenty of books and videos on how to do it.

 

[GrayGoose]

Time to invest in cap and ball revolvers…

Only if and when all criminals, law enforcement, and government officials revert to them as well. Until then, we get to have the same as what they have, so says the U.S. Bill of Rights.

 

[dinky450]

 

[ma96782]

How should we deal with politicians who INTENTIONALLY/KNOWLINGLY pass Unconstitutional Laws?

Yeah.....IMHO.....putting it on the BALLOT was a "cute move" to avoid the backlash against certain politicians/individuals. Though IMHO......the AG should also be held accountable (amongst the others).

TO BE CLEAR.......I'm NOT calling for violence........as that would be illegal.

Aloha, Mark

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

Everything about 114 violates the U.S. Constitution, the Oregon Constitution and/or The Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1986.

The creators of 114 should be sued for deprivation of our Constitutional rights.
Title 42 U.S. Code § 1983 - Civil action for deprivation of rights.
Title 42 U.S. Code § 1985 - Conspiracy to interfere with civil rights
Title 42 U.S. Code § 1986 - Action for neglect to prevent
18 U.S. Code § 241 - Conspiracy against rights
18 U.S. Code § 242 - Deprivation of rights under color of law

Maybe should be, but more likely can't be
#EndQualifiedImmunity

Frequently Asked Questions About Ending Qualified Immunity - Institute for Justice

“Qualified immunity” is a special legal protection for all local, state, or federal government workers who can only be held accountable for violating someone’s rights if a court has previously ruled that it was “clearly established” those precise actions were unconstitutional.

ij.org

 

[dinky450]

How should we deal with politicians who INTENTIONALLY/KNOWLINGLY pass Unconstitutional Laws?

Yeah.....IMHO.....putting it on the BALLOT was a "cute move" to avoid the backlash against certain politicians/individuals. Though IMHO......the AG should also be held accountable (amongst the others).

TO BE CLEAR.......I'm NOT calling for violence........as that would be illegal.

Aloha, Mark

Nope it should of never reached where it did. Just because majority votes it in doesn't mean it makes it law. reason for the constitution to keep majority over taking others. The courts should of slapped the bubblegum out of those people when they brought the draft in to put it up for vote.

 

[BPOR11]

Democrats have been packing the courts for a long time.

View attachment 1318574

And the reason these conversations are even happening at all. This should be an automatic injunction.

 

[Hopeful_Vet]

There's a YT 2A channel called the "The Four Boxes Diner" hosted by a 2A lawyer.

People, take the time to listen to 20-30 of his latest videos and you will be assured that 114 will be shot down along with the ATF pistol brace rule.