Oregon New Petition Oregon 2020-008

[ZigZagZeke]

This looks really good to me. The proposed changes are in bold:

The People of Oregon amend their Constitution to add The Common Firearms Act(new amendment in bold):

Article I, Section 27. Right to bear arms; military subordinate to civil power.

The people shall have the right to bear arms for the defence [sic] of themselves, and the State, but the Military shall be kept in strict subordination to the civil power[.]

Section 27b. (1) The right to bear arms includes the ability to acquire, possess, use, or transfer common firearms for self-defense. Laws regulating firearms may not place unreasonable burdens or special liabilities upon the right to acquire a common firearm for self-defense, or to keep it in a readily available operable state for self-defense within one's home, when carriedupon one's person or when temporarily transferred to another person for a lawful purpose.

(2) "Common firearms for self-defense" are firearms that enable persons to defend themselvesor others with reliable precision and include those firearms and compatible ammunition magazines that were not subject to civilian purchase restrictions as of July 1, 2018, in Oregon, other than mandatory background checks. "Common firearms for self-defense" also includeany functionally similar models of firearms, mechanical actions, or magazines developed thereafter, so long as such items are not subject to civilian purchase restrictions under federallaw at the time of purchase. "Common firearms for self-defense" do not include devices subjectto purchase restrictions by the National Firearms Act, such as machine guns, short-barreled rifles or shotguns, other destructive devices, nor do such firearms include any firearm accessories or modifications used to enable or mimic automatic firing, including but notlimited to "bump stocks." No firearm shall be excluded from the definition of a "commonfirearm for self-defense" because it utilizes a semiautomatic action, a threaded barrel, thecapacity to mount an accessory feature that is otherwise legal for civilian ownership under federal law, or a grip or stock configuration that is not designed to mimic automatic firing.

(3) This section does not prevent the authority of the state or its authorized subdivisions to enforce firearm regulations in effect as of July 1, 2018, or any regulations enacted thereafter that are specifically limited to regulating the acquisition, possession or use of firearms by: (a) minors (b) non-citizens; (c) persons under arrest, pre- or post-conviction state supervision or those with prior felony convictions; (d) those under domestic violence restraining orders or other court orders limiting access to or possession of firearms following notice to the individual and an opportunity to be heard before a judge of the Circuit Courts; (e) those who have had their possession of or access to firearms temporarily limited pursuant to legal processes designed to determine if they pose a serious risk to self or others; (f) those adjudicated to be mentally defective, incompetent or a serious risk to self or others, or those involuntarily committed to a mental health facility; (g) those who carry or use firearms in public, or (h) anyone prohibited from possessing firearms under federal law.

(4) Nothing in this section expands the authority of the State or any of its political subdivisions to regulate firearms, nor limits any other rights otherwise retained by the People of Oregon under Article I, Section 27.

https://sos.oregon.gov/elections/Documents/irr/text-petition-2020-008.pdf

Read More

 

[3MTA3]

Oregon Constitutional Amendment to limit the authority of the State with regard to currently legal firearms, and further defines all firearms not covered by the NFA or other Federal law as common. Sponsors actually live in Oregon. I haven't critically read all test, but this doesn't look like a trojan horse that looks pro gun while slipping in language that implements more restrictions.

https://sos.oregon.gov/elections/Documents/irr/text-petition-2020-008.pdf

 

[USAisTheBest]

That unreasonable burden is always a messy wording for me.

 

[KEMOSABEJR1]

Not sure if any one has seen this... If this came from our own members, GREAT JOB! Lets get out and sign this once it comes around. If any one knows or has info where we can sign this, post on this thread please

 

[3MTA3]

@Joe Link we should invite the chief petitioners to join this conversation on NWFA:
Eric Winters [email protected]
Sharon Preston [email protected]
Carlyan Castellano [email protected]

 

[Ura-Ki]

Looks good so far, passes the sniff test from 50 feet away, so that's good! I DO want to see language that opens the doors to further changes th at firm up our 2nd, and less restrictions, and it would be helpful to include Knives in this I.P.
It would also be very helpful to make Or. a constitutional carry state and to recognise all other States carry permits, this can be added to the proposed I.P. easely enough under the readily accessible section, same with knives!

 

[USAisTheBest]

Looks good so far, passes the sniff test from 50 feet away, so that's good! I DO want to see language that opens the doors to further changes th at firm up our 2nd, and less restrictions, and it would be helpful to include Knives in this I.P.
It would also be very helpful to make Or. a constitutional carry state and to recognise all other States carry permits, this can be added to the proposed I.P. easely enough under the readily accessible section, same with knives!

I wouldn't push it with all state reciprocity. Getting this on the ballot is one thing, having it pass is another. That's gonna be a big deal breaker for many allowing out of staters to roam freely with concealed guns.

 

[3MTA3]

Looks good so far, passes the sniff test from 50 feet away, so that's good! I DO want to see language that opens the doors to further changes th at firm up our 2nd, and less restrictions, and it would be helpful to include Knives in this I.P.
It would also be very helpful to make Or. a constitutional carry state and to recognise all other States carry permits, this can be added to the proposed I.P. easely enough under the readily accessible section, same with knives!

That's a great point that is frequently missed - the Second Amendment as well as the Oregon Constitution refer to ARMS and not just firearms. Arms include just about anything that can be used for defense and includes all edged weapons as well as clubs, tasers, pepper spray, etc.

 

[ZigZagZeke]

Looks good so far, passes the sniff test from 50 feet away, so that's good! I DO want to see language that opens the doors to further changes th at firm up our 2nd, and less restrictions, and it would be helpful to include Knives in this I.P.
It would also be very helpful to make Or. a constitutional carry state and to recognise all other States carry permits, this can be added to the proposed I.P. easely enough under the readily accessible section, same with knives!

I think this measure as written is about as likely to pass as we can hope for. They have very smartly avoided challenging any items that would make this a hot button item for the other side. They are not trying to repeal or negate any recently passed legislation and that's a smart move. We can address those issues separately. Let's get this passed with as little controversy as possible.

 

[3MTA3]

I think this measure as written is about as likely to pass as we can hope for. They have very smartly avoided challenging any items that would make this a hot button item for the other side. They are not trying to repeal or negate any recently passed legislation and that's a smart move. We can address those issues separately. Let's get this passed with as liuttle controversy as possible.

I'm in agreement in a "you eat an elephant one bite at a time" manner. Push the easy stuff first and then keep pushing the harder things. This is how the other side has been taking our freedoms away - one bite at a time.

 

[NW Backpacker]

That unreasonable burden is always a messy wording for me.

Agreed. Don't really like section 3g either (edit: with respect to future restrictions on carrying in public). Overall it's good.

 

[Ura-Ki]

Agreed. Don't really like section 3g either (edit: with respect to future restrictions on carrying in public). Overall it's good.

Yea, I latched on to that one too, it leaves the doors open for bad stuff later

 

[3MTA3]

Agreed. Don't really like section 3g either (edit: with respect to future restrictions on carrying in public). Overall it's good.

Yea, I latched on to that one too, it leaves the doors open for bad stuff later

Yes, this needs to clearly and explicity with no wiggle room for ambiguous interpretation say "keep your damn meat hooks off my firearms. Now go away and bother someone who needs to be bothered".

 

[SUPER X]

I wouldn't push it with all state reciprocity. Getting this on the ballot is one thing, having it pass is another. That's gonna be a big deal breaker for many allowing out of staters to roam freely with concealed guns.

I agree I think it will freak some people out .

 

[USAisTheBest]

I agree I think it will freak some people out .

I'm certainly not ok with it. I don't mind that Oregon doesn't have any reciprocity. At best I'd support it for states that touch ours.

 

[Ura-Ki]

Prolly wanna let that dog alone, we WANT national constitutional carry, and national reciprocity, so it might be best to leave that for another fight at another time!

 

[CHLChris]

Why the carve-out against bump stocks? What a stupid line in a common sense proposal.

Now, I hate bump stocks in the same way that I hate lasers. Good for some folks, but just not for me. But I see no good reason to make them not okay just because they are unpopular right now with anti-gunners.

 

[USAisTheBest]

Prolly wanna let that dog alone, we WANT national constitutional carry, and national reciprocity, so it might be best to leave that for another fight at another time!

I don't want it. I respect states rights to decide how they give out their own state permits. Some states like our own are at the discretion of law enforcement which I also support. States should have the right to decide which states best fit their own standards, and not be forced by big government to accept any and all permits from another state. But then again if you like big government telling your state what to do it might appeal to you. Might seem like a no brainer to let congress pass such a law, but really you're just giving them more power over how your state regulates firearms. Never a good thing in my opinion.

 

[CountryGent]

I like the idea in general. And I think we're going to have to have something like this in place if there is any chance of stopping the madness in Salem. The language about the NFA, however, could result in us owners/collectors of said items being thrown to the wolves though.

 

[3MTA3]

I like the idea in general. And I think we're going to have to have something like this in place if there is any chance of stopping the madness in Salem. The language about the NFA, however, could result in us owners/collectors of said items being thrown to the wolves though.

That's why I'm hoping we can draw them into the discussion here - to help them spot unintended consequences as well as to get them visibility and otherwise get support from the firearm community.