JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
I confess to not actually reading through HB-3075, I need to.
If (when) HB3075 passes; and signed into law, it does state that citizens who legally bought 10+ Rd mags between Dec 8, 2022 until whatever Court decides in favor of State, won't be prosecuted/charged for violating M114 while its under injunction/stayed by the Trial Court..

And it does push permit to purchase out to July 1st, 2026 for specific weapon types, and then for all gun types after July 1st 2028.

All while ratcheting fees for things up to a ridiculous number; again showing their extreme disdain for lawful gun owners who aren't wealthy
 
Yes, I think this weakens our argument its unconstitutional to require a class that doesn't exist. Now one does.
Guaranteed this will be used in court, "third parties are already opening approved training centers".

In the immergut case the state lawyer lied and said the permit process was ready to go. Audience members laughed. Now they could say "our application process is open and training center is in place". It might be enough to convince immergut to start permits now or very soon. What the bubblegum were they thinking starting this business now? 10 to 1 this is a relative of, or someone in with the county sheriff or sheriff's family members. Or could be an anti-gun sheriff I suppose, but those are rare.
 
Last Edited:
Tony Aiello from X today (April 11)

View: https://x.com/TonyAielloJr/status/1910733215587045794



Bits:
He will file the appeal to ORSC next week.
3075 does not 'moot' anything automatically - has to be argued in court.
If you plan to buy a gun, BUY NOW; he is concerned about 3075 being implemented.
Bought 2 today. I think I'm done. But I said that before… :s0112:

Pew pew!
IMG_3631.jpeg
Just a.22
IMG_3619.jpeg
 
Oregon House Bill (HB-3075) seems to be on a fast track though the Democratic Super-Majority Legislature.

This Bill takes everything in Measure 114 effectively passing it into law which will make the current legal appeals by Second Amendment advocates a mute point.

I listened to an interview today on Lars Larsen's show and it did not paint an optimistic picture for Oregon gun owners.

According to the interview HB-3075 seems sure to pass and Kotex to sure to sign it into law.


I'm sure we will hear more about it in the coming days,....
What is the strategy here? Why didn't the legislature create and pass this legislation in the first place, rather than create a measure for voters to vote on? Seems like a bait and switch. Get the pro-gun side to put all their money into fighting M114, while they simply pass this law, causing us to have to start over again fighting it.
 
What is the strategy here? Why didn't the legislature create and pass this legislation in the first place, rather than create a measure for voters to vote on? Seems like a bait and switch. Get the pro-gun side to put all their money into fighting M114, while they simply pass this law, causing us to have to start over again fighting it.
I think you are giving them too much credit. They aren't that smart nor plan that many moves ahead. Remember the driving force is Levo, the demon priest, and the left wing anti gunners (including D legislators and Kotex biotch).

They did a petition which made the initiative. It barely passed. Then they lost in court (Raschio).

So legislature said "we want our civilian disarmament and liberal vote mobilizing to continue, irregardless of what the courts say". So they made the new bill to replace m114. If this new bill were to lose in court there would be some other civilian disarmament bill next year (and there will be irregardless because it's never enough for them, they have to get more every year because their goal is complete disarmament of non police).
 
If HB-3075 passes the Legislature and is signed into law we won't be hearing anything more about Measure 114.

And the couple of million dollars Second Amendment advocates have spent fighting 114 will be lost because the new law, (If and when HB-3075 is signed by Kotek.) circumvents 114 altogether.


29 of Oregon's 36 counties voted aganist measure 114. (Roughly 70% to 75% of Oregon's land mass.)

Quite a cynical demonstration from Oregon Democrats who prove, by their actions, that not only do they believe in selective application of our Constitution but they do not believe in political pluralism in Oregon politics either.
Some Oregon Taxpayers are going to want the State's defense fees paid for.
 
"While we want to be clear that we do not support these unconstitutional measures,..."

They may not support it but they darn well intend to profit from it.

Same goes for background checks. Lots of FFLs have earned income from background check requirements required by both Federal and State laws.
 
I've mentioned it before in one of the other M114 related threads, but if HB-3075 is the exact same thing as M114, and the Oregon Supreme Court was to miraculously overturn the appeals court decision on 114 (allowing Raschio's ruling that 114 is unconstitutional to stand)—wouldn't this automatically be a defeat for HB-3075?

Judicial precedence should null and void all further attempts at the same restrictions (much like if any state attempted to legislate new segregation laws, they would be instantly overturned).
 
I've mentioned it before in one of the other M114 related threads, but if HB-3075 is the exact same thing as M114, and the Oregon Supreme Court was to miraculously overturn the appeals court decision on 114 (allowing Raschio's ruling that 114 is unconstitutional to stand)—wouldn't this automatically be a defeat for HB-3075?

Judicial precedence should null and void all further attempts at the same restrictions (much like if any state attempted to legislate new segregation laws, they would be instantly overturned).
Maybe . Thing is, 3075 ""fixes"" M114, so Oregon lawyers likely will argue that they ""removed"" the "problematic" parts (the WHOLE thing is problematic and should have been binned before ever going to the ballots, IMO)
 
FFLs are there to make money. They'll do what they have to do so that they can stay in business.

More legislation means more money from those who are willing to pay.

Sadly.
 
What I still think isn't clear (among many things) is are we allowed to carry mags over 10rd and take them to public land to shoot. I believe the language was "designated shooting range" or law lawful purposes.
 
What I still think isn't clear (among many things) is are we allowed to carry mags over 10rd and take them to public land to shoot. I believe the language was "designated shooting range" or law lawful purposes.
Not sure. But the way I read it 11+ mags will not be allowed (legally) to be carried in the form of concealed/open carry.
 
Not sure. But the way I read it 11+ mags will not be allowed (legally) to be carried in the form of concealed/open carry.
[(C)] (iii) While engaging in the legal use of the large-capacity magazine, at a public or private
shooting range or shooting gallery or for recreational activities such as hunting, to the extent permitted
under state law;

Is concealed carry not considered a recreational activity?
 

Upcoming Events

New Classified Ads

Back Top