Oregon Oregon House Bill 2572

[CountryGent]

The Associated Press has some coverage of the latest lunacy: Oregon, a hotbed of extremism, seeks to curb paramilitaries

 

[ilikegunspdx]

The Associated Press has some coverage of the latest lunacy: Oregon, a hotbed of extremism, seeks to curb paramilitaries

Kind of looks to me that this is focused on the several antifa vs proud boys clashes we had. The key being "can't interfere with legal right to do" (i.e. protest). So looks to me like this is all geared towards punishing anti-protestors while protecting protestors and the anarchists who take advantage of their crowds to wreak mayhem, commit arson, assault, etc.

 

[MichaelH]

Kind of looks to me that this is focused on the several antifa vs proud boys clashes we had. The key being "can't interfere with legal right to do" (i.e. protest). So looks to me like this is all geared towards punishing anti-protestors while protecting protestors and the anarchists who take advantage of their crowds to wreak mayhem, commit arson, assault, etc.

I think this is more geared toward armed disruption of legislatures, city counsel meetings etc. Sure everyone has a different definition of tyranny, but when armed groups of people try to stop government from doing it's job—courts determine what's tyranny (I can imagine eyes rolling)—then they just look threatening and lawless. That said, I'm still not a fan of this law bc it's not necessary.

There's no practical way to distinguish between protesters/counter-protesters and both the left and right switched those roles in recent times. From afar it all looked for pretty chaotic behavior for all involved. If there was any training that involved coordination for opposing groups that training looked….deficient.

 

[CamoDeafie]

There's no practical way to distinguish between protesters/counter-protesters

I'd say that was easily disproven..

Black clad armed with clubs, pepper spray, molotov cocktails, fireworks, weapons with signs taped to them (baseball bats and spears/flagpoles), sometimes guns.. red and black flags,

Camo/greens/earth tones, armor, AR15s, blue jeans, almost no signs except the Proud Boys' or similar groups.....



That said... this bill is awful. It'll be worse when it gets voted on and comes out on SOS.

Are there anyone planning to launch lawsuits against this bill?

 

[ilikegunspdx]

I'd say that was easily disproven..

Black clad armed with clubs, pepper spray, molotov cocktails, fireworks, weapons with signs taped to them (baseball bats and spears/flagpoles), sometimes guns.. red and black flags,

Camo/greens/earth tones, armor, AR15s, blue jeans, almost no signs except the Proud Boys' or similar groups.....



That said... this bill is awful. It'll be worse when it gets voted on and comes out on SOS.

Are there anyone planning to launch lawsuits against this bill?

Protester vs counter protester is already distinguished ahead of time. A protest is planned and group like proud boys is planning a counter protest close by f.e. Look at K Brown's remarks before the proud boy rallies in the last 2 years. Her language was "we can't let them come in here..."

At least in part, It's a means to let them disarm/ keep out certain groups they don't like and to prevent proud boy vs antifa events like we had in the past imo. But it may also give them an excuse to proactively disarm or prosecute other groups they don't like. This is gonna be a one-sided thing, mark my words. It won't be used on antifa or left wing radical groups. This has Kotek written all over it and is her aggressive style IMO. This is giving them the legal authority to go after proud boys and other groups.




Zero enforcement when rioters assault, burn buildings, loot, burn precincts, but when it is other groups, "we won't stand for any form of violence", declares state of emergency, calls in more police, etc. Here her words here:

Gov. Kate Brown speaks to the media about planned Proud Boys rally in Portland

Gov. Kate Brown speaks to the press about the planned Proud Boys rally in Portland on Saturday.Read more about this story at The Oregonian/OregonLive: https:...

www.youtube.com

 

[Provincial]

Here is the historical example of this proposed law:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enabling_Act_of_1933

"was a law that gave the German Cabinet – most importantly, the Chancellor – the powers to make and enforce laws without the involvement of the Reichstag or Weimar President Paul von Hindenburg, leading to the rise of Nazi Germany. Critically, the Enabling Act allowed the Chancellor to bypass the system of checks and balances in the government. The act rested upon Article 48 of the Weimar Constitution which gave the government emergency powers during periods of unrest. Among these powers was the ability to create and enforce laws that could explicitly violate individual rights prescribed in the constitution."​

This law gave Hitler the power to silence dissent by his opponents, by using he powers of the State. Read the whole Wikipedia article and the link to Article 48 to get an idea of how these laws are abused.

Burning of the Reichstag = January 6

Burning of the Books = Internet and Media censorship/spread of propaganda

Enabling Act of 1933/Article 48 of the Weimar Republic = HB 2572 and others coming

Kristallnacht = Yet to come

 

[dancinghippos]

Here is the historical example of this proposed law:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enabling_Act_of_1933

"was a law that gave the German Cabinet – most importantly, the Chancellor – the powers to make and enforce laws without the involvement of the Reichstag or Weimar President Paul von Hindenburg, leading to the rise of Nazi Germany. Critically, the Enabling Act allowed the Chancellor to bypass the system of checks and balances in the government. The act rested upon Article 48 of the Weimar Constitution which gave the government emergency powers during periods of unrest. Among these powers was the ability to create and enforce laws that could explicitly violate individual rights prescribed in the constitution."​

This law gave Hitler the power to silence dissent by his opponents, by using he powers of the State. Read the whole Wikipedia article and the link to Article 48 to get an idea of how these laws are abused.

Burning of the Reichstag = January 6

Burning of the Books = Internet and Media censorship/spread of propaganda

Enabling Act of 1933/Article 48 of the Weimar Republic = HB 2572 and others coming

Kristallnacht = Yet to come

Use a search engine for Detroit mudroots . You will get several articles about an armed group who escort elderly people to the grocery stores and help them pump gas safely. It seems like the Oregon politicians want to prevent people from defending their neighbors while crime flourishes

 

[P7M13]

Use a search engine for Detroit mudroots . You will get several articles about an armed group who escort elderly people to the grocery stores and help them pump gas safely. It seems like the Oregon politicians want to prevent people from defending their neighbors while crime flourishes

The Yahoo article (link here) writes about the group being compared to the Black Panthers -- which, as the Panthers splintered and became more militant, became the unspoken seed for the Gun Control Act of 1968. Given Michigan's slide into hair-on-fire gun control, this group's efforts may have unintended consequences.
The first picture of the article, taken in Detroit, is about 5 blocks from where my mother last lived before we moved her out of Detroit.

 

[Member 53328]

Key word is INTENT.

Good luck. Oh and eat a bag of d!cks on your way out.

 

[MichaelH]

Here is the historical example of this proposed law:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enabling_Act_of_1933

"was a law that gave the German Cabinet – most importantly, the Chancellor – the powers to make and enforce laws without the involvement of the Reichstag or Weimar President Paul von Hindenburg, leading to the rise of Nazi Germany. Critically, the Enabling Act allowed the Chancellor to bypass the system of checks and balances in the government. The act rested upon Article 48 of the Weimar Constitution which gave the government emergency powers during periods of unrest. Among these powers was the ability to create and enforce laws that could explicitly violate individual rights prescribed in the constitution."​

This law gave Hitler the power to silence dissent by his opponents, by using he powers of the State. Read the whole Wikipedia article and the link to Article 48 to get an idea of how these laws are abused.

Burning of the Reichstag = January 6

Burning of the Books = Internet and Media censorship/spread of propaganda

Enabling Act of 1933/Article 48 of the Weimar Republic = HB 2572 and others coming

Kristallnacht = Yet to come

Not exactly the best analogy to THIS legislation, IMO: different level of government; grant of authority w/o legislative or judicial check, etc.

I'm of the belief that too many people (left and right) try to analogize things happening in America—which has a fundamentally different structure of government, geography and breakdown of state power bc of federalism—to Weimar Germany and the Nazis' actions/strategies to take power. My concern isn't that it detracts from the horror that the Nazis inflicted on the world (which it does and many find knee-jerk offensive and will automatically ignore what you're saying), but overuse of that analogy dilutes the seriousness of making such a comparison. Sure there is a starting point where the analogy starts to be appropriate, but I'd argue that's when the executive or legislature starts to ignore the powers of the court (remember, our courts don't have an army or police force to compel compliance and government willfully ignoring a court order suggests that government is willing to simply take power.)

 

[CamoDeafie]

government willfully ignoring a court order suggests that government is willing to simply take power

Cargill.

Can you get bumpstocks?

Has THE ATF conceded that bumpstocks are not MGs?

 

[ilikegunspdx]

One thing that is analogous to 1930s Germany is the tactics. German Gov. at that time did not like Jews and sought to control/regulate them. They had Jewish people sign up on a register. That was so they knew where they are. Later they added more and more regulations fe what they can own, where they can work or live. Later they decided they wanted to eliminate them.

Here we have a current gov that doesn't like guns. They want to control/regulate them. To do that they have to know where they are. Thus they need a register such as passed in OR and is pending in WA. It's likely that more and more regulations will be coming to control them. If they decide to eliminate them through bans and/or confiscation, they have the means via the register and laws.

I don't means to equate the horror of genocide to personal property here, only that it is the same tactics.

And I'm purposely not getting into German gov. disarming citizens because I don't know enough about the specifics of that. It is clear though they eliminated groups organizing that they didn't like via strong arm tactics. How similar will measures like this one in OR be to that in the future? I don't know but it has me concerned. Every ruler from way back seeks to eliminate their competition or opposing viewpoints. Our democracy is supposed to be different. Hopefully it can withstand attempts to lay the groundwork for tyranny (which this OR proposed law certainly seems to do, to my mind).

 

[Provincial]

Not exactly the best analogy to THIS legislation, IMO: different level of government; grant of authority w/o legislative or judicial check, etc.

I'm of the belief that too many people (left and right) try to analogize things happening in America—which has a fundamentally different structure of government, geography and breakdown of state power bc of federalism—to Weimar Germany and the Nazis' actions/strategies to take power. My concern isn't that it detracts from the horror that the Nazis inflicted on the world (which it does and many find knee-jerk offensive and will automatically ignore what you're saying), but overuse of that analogy dilutes the seriousness of making such a comparison. Sure there is a starting point where the analogy starts to be appropriate, but I'd argue that's when the executive or legislature starts to ignore the powers of the court (remember, our courts don't have an army or police force to compel compliance and government willfully ignoring a court order suggests that government is willing to simply take power.)

It was a mistake to use the = symbol, because it implied that I was making a literal comparison, which was not my intent. I did not intend to make each item "equal to," but similar to. The point was the progression of actions. The often quoted (or misquoted) saying, which I won't put in quotes because it has so many slight variations, is appropriate:

History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme.

The trend here is that politicians are manipulating public opinion with the intent of acquiring overreaching power. They intend to use these powers to entrench themselves permanently in power, and any goals beyond that may vary. The progression of tightening control of speech, freedom of association, and political expression/protest is a repeating pattern of repression, especially when combined with selective enforcement of laws.

These people view themselves as the only legitimate leaders of the nation/state/local government. To them, there is no chance that others with different goals could wrest the positions of authority away from them (because their goals are perfect) and use those powers to promote goals antithetical to their goals, but it happens.

Setting up overreaching powers invites chaos, because they remove the checks and balances that restrain those who wield them from extreme behavior that is destructive to the society.

 

[fmvolume86]

they need a law to arrest Antifa terrorists on the streets ? I thought we already had a law against home grown terrorism. I mean they wear all black like the fascists they are, what more do you need?

 

[CamoDeafie]

they need a law to arrest Antifa terrorists on the streets ? I thought we already had a law against home grown terrorism. I mean they wear all black like the fascists they are, what more do you need?

Not who they're going after. They want to go after people like these from Virginia

 

[fmvolume86]

Not who they're going after. They want to go after people like these from Virginia View attachment 1370249View attachment 1370250View attachment 1370248

oh, Americans who have had enough the bullbubblegum......... make sense the Left would paint these people as terrorists. I mean by all means if they commit terrorist acts then yes arrest them as well. But these weren't the people destroying and burning cities for 2 years straight and the media called them "peaceful" while federal buildings were on fire. Fighting back against the govt is one thing, Antifa targeted innocent people and destroyed places of business of mom and pop shops

 

[CamoDeafie]

oh, Americans who have had enough the bullbubblegum......... make sense the Left would paint these people as terrorists. I mean by all means if they commit terrorist acts then yes arrest them as well. But these weren't the people destroying and burning cities for 2 years straight and the media called them "peaceful" while federal buildings were on fire. Fighting back against the govt is one thing, Antifa targeted innocent people and destroyed places of business of mom and pop shops

Preaching to the choir man, preaching to the choir. The antifa is pretty much the militant arm of a certain ideology and Party.... whereas the people that's being targeted in this awful bill, happens to be by and large, not the ones causing all the visible problems that gets blamed on them.