JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
It will now be unlawful to refuse to allow the police to inspect a magazine you have...even if you don’t have a gun!


well, that will never hold up in court it violates your 4th amendment rights!


"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized"
 
Which means all this crap they just passed is illegal and will be slapped down.

Somebody's gonna be upset.

I love info from the forums, but there's no substitute for reading it for yourself and making your own judgements. That post only gave you half the equation. Here's the full equation. The first part of 166.170 says "(1) Except as expressly authorized by state statute,

What is "authorized" for localities to regulate is stated in 166.171 and 166.173.

___________________________________________________________________________________



166.170 State preemption. (1) Except as expressly authorized by state statute, the authority to regulate in any matter whatsoever the sale, acquisition, transfer, ownership, possession, storage, transportation or use of firearms or any element relating to firearms and components thereof, including ammunition, is vested solely in the Legislative Assembly.
(2) Except as expressly authorized by state statute, no county, city or other municipal corporation or district may enact civil or criminal ordinances, including but not limited to zoning ordinances, to regulate, restrict or prohibit the sale, acquisition, transfer, ownership, possession, storage, transportation or use of firearms or any element relating to firearms and components thereof, including ammunition. Ordinances that are contrary to this subsection are void. [1995 s.s. c.1 §1]

166.171 Authority of county to regulate discharge of firearms. (1) A county may adopt ordinances to regulate, restrict or prohibit the discharge of firearms within their boundaries.
(2) Ordinances adopted under subsection (1) of this section may not apply to or affect:
(a) A person discharging a firearm in the lawful defense of person or property.
(b) A person discharging a firearm in the course of lawful hunting.
(c) A landowner and guests of the landowner discharging a firearm, when the discharge will not endanger adjacent persons or property.
(d) A person discharging a firearm on a public or private shooting range, shooting gallery or other area designed and built for the purpose of target shooting.
(e) A person discharging a firearm in the course of target shooting on public land that is not inside an urban growth boundary or the boundary of a city, if the discharge will not endanger persons or property.
(f) An employee of the United States Department of Agriculture, acting within the scope of employment, discharging a firearm in the course of the lawful taking of wildlife. [1995 s.s. c.1 §2; 2009 c.556 §1]

166.173 Authority of city or county to regulate possession of loaded firearms in public places. (1) A city or county may adopt ordinances to regulate, restrict or prohibit the possession of loaded firearms in public places as defined in ORS 161.015.
(2) Ordinances adopted under subsection (1) of this section do not apply to or affect:
(a) A law enforcement officer in the performance of official duty.
(b) A member of the military in the performance of official duty.
(c) A person licensed to carry a concealed handgun.
(d) A person authorized to possess a loaded firearm while in or on a public building or court facility under ORS 166.370.
(e) An employee of the United States Department of Agriculture, acting within the scope of employment, who possesses a loaded firearm in the course of the lawful taking of wildlife. [1995 s.s. c.1 §4; 1999 c.782 §8; 2009 c.556 §3]
 
So yes they have the right to regulate most of the things being talked about, but there are some things they wont be able to regulate, for example shooting outside a growth boundary or city limit like swan island or other public lands OR A landowner and guests of the landowner discharging a firearm, when the discharge will not endanger adjacent persons or property.
 
well, that will never hold up in court it violates your 4th amendment rights!



Tell that to Bloomberg and the NYPD and they will show you 10 years of getting away with "stop and frisk" tactics and "5,5,5" quotas. Now the citizens of NY are finally getting their day in court. We'll cross our fingers and see how it goes and maybe the decision will have some impact here.
 
That's nothing, it took nearly 40 years for the supreme court to overturn the DC gun ban.


Just because a law is passed doesn't mean it's valid and lawful in the context of the constitution.
 
That's nothing, it took nearly 40 years for the supreme court to overturn the DC gun ban.


Just because a law is passed doesn't mean it's valid and lawful in the context of the constitution.

The problem is, between the time of passing and the time of overturning in the highest courts, the laws are active and will be enforced. That includes unconstitutional bans and confiscations. Sure, it'll get overturned, but in the mean time the grabbers can execute. And that cycle can continue indefinitely, just make up a new one, pass it and enforce until overturned. The future is pretty bleak, especially once there's a majority in favor and nobody votes them out.
 

Upcoming Events

Oregon Arms Collectors March Gun Show
Portland, OR
Tillamook Gun & Knife Show
Tillamook, OR
"The Original" Kalispell Gun Show
Kalispell, MT
Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR
Kids Firearm Safety 2 Class
Springfield, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top