Oregon IPs 17 and 18 - They're back at it...

[Zoolander]

If they brush it off then you could look into lawyer or whatever. Lawyer would also get more urgency most likely being the limited timeframe before November.

What if collectively we did that? Odds are we're going to lose our sh*t in November, what about using our money to fight this? Conversation and flyers are great but at the end of the day money is all that will make a difference. They used money to get these signatures, let's use ours to fight it. Maybe there is a clerical error or loophole to keep these off the ballot.

I'd rather spend my money fighting this then buying a bunch of guns I have to hide in 6 months and only shoot on private property. Additionally, this forum will cease to exist if those laws go into effect as they're being proposed. Nobody will feel safe discussing, selling or posting anything publicly.

 

[dancinghippos]

What if collectively we did that? Odds are we're going to lose our sh*t in November, what about using our money to fight this? Conversation and flyers are great but at the end of the day money is all that will make a difference. They used money to get these signatures, let's use ours to fight it. Maybe there is a clerical error or loophole to keep these off the ballot.

I'd rather spend my money fighting this then buying a bunch of guns I have to hide in 6 months and only shoot on private property. Additionally, this forum will cease to exist if those laws go into effect as they're being proposed. Nobody will feel safe discussing, selling or posting anything publicly.

We can also use our money to fight it the usual political way. We are at the beginning of the political campaign season

 

[dancinghippos]

7. A semiautomatic shotgun that has both of the following:

(A) A folding or telescoping stock; and
(B) A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon, thumbhole stock or vertical handgrip.

8. A semiautomatic shotgun that has a fixed magazine that is capable of holding more than 10 rounds or a semiautomatic shotgun that has:

(A) The ability to accept a detachable magazine; or
(B) A revolving cylinder.

is that 17 or 18?

 

[ilikegunspdx]

Imo if it's a legit complaint the electoral board or whoever regulates that would have to respond to it. If they don't then you could pursue more expensive options.

gathering up all the evidence of breaking the rules is absolutely vital no matter what path is taken. Without that you can't do anything pretty much. Just my thoughts.

 

[Hawaiian]

is that 17 or 18?

18

 

[CountryGent]

I'm not turning much with google yet, but has any of the national pro-2A groups (e.g., NRA, GOA, 2A Foundation, et al.) or Oregon-based ones (e.g., Oregon Outdoor Council, OFF, et al.) taking any legal action yet or are at least preparing to do so?

 

[3MTA3]

I'm not turning much with google yet, but has any of the national pro-2A groups (e.g., NRA, GOA, 2A Foundation, et al.) or Oregon-based ones (e.g., Oregon Outdoor Council, OFF, et al.) taking any legal action yet or are at least preparing to do so?

Not sure about this iteration of the magazine ban/gun permit requirement but IIRC OFF challenged it on that very point and the then and current Oregon AG denied them and gave her blessing. I think the reason was that the "single purpose" was interpreted by her as reducing gun violence.

IMO if the IP also included language to castrate testicle bearing cisgendered persons who failed to use someone's personal pronouns of the minute it would still get her seal of approval.

It still needs to be challenged on that basis because resolution won't happen within Oregon - it will need to make it beyond the 9th Circuit Court for another b-slapping from Thomas. Challenging it adds one more dimension to our eventual case.

 

[CountryGent]

Indeed, I remember the last time they tried this crap (IIRC, IP 43 and 44), there was legal challenges by NRA, OFF, and OOC. Here's hoping it happens again and this does not make it to the 2022 ballot.

 

[Ura-Ki]

Not sure about this iteration of the magazine ban/gun permit requirement but IIRC OFF challenged it on that very point and the then and current Oregon AG denied them and gave her blessing. I think the reason was that the "single purpose" was interpreted by her as reducing gun violence.

IMO if the IP also included language to castrate testicle bearing cisgendered persons who failed to use someone's personal pronouns of the minute it would still get her seal of approval.

It still needs to be challenged on that basis because resolution won't happen within Oregon - it will need to make it beyond the 9th Circuit Court for another b-slapping from Thomas. Challenging it adds one more dimension to our eventual case.

Oregon seems to have a problem with "Text, as informed by History and Tradition" and that should be the new gold standard applied to ALL initiatives, or legislation, or settled law!
Reminding our employees in the State offices of that should see this all go away, but it won't, so, it's gonna take a lot of work and money to hold their feet to the fire! These state employees should be fired and banned from any public office for life, and they should spend some time behind bars for their egregious actions in denying or attempting to deny rights! There is a power here within the Several States, maybe it's time we used it, the power of the Militia through the county Sheriff's, it's time We the People gather with those sheriff's and make our demands known and carry them out! It's happened before, time to loose that collar!

 

[ilikegunspdx]

Oregon seems to have a problem with "Text, as informed by History and Tradition" and that should be the new gold standard applied to ALL initiatives, or legislation, or settled law!
Reminding our employees in the State offices of that should see this all go away, but it won't, so, it's gonna take a lot of work and money to hold their feet to the fire! These state employees should be fired and banned from any public office for life, and they should spend some time behind bars for their egregious actions in denying or attempting to deny rights! There is a power here within the Several States, maybe it's time we used it, the power of the Militia through the county Sheriff's, it's time We the People gather with those sheriff's and make our demands known and carry them out! It's happened before, time to loose that collar!

Imo it may not take a lot of $ if they violated the election rules as someone stated above. It they did that and there is evidence it would never make it to the ballot. And the election board or whoever may investigate it for no cost, because they have to. Again, if there is evidence.

 

[3MTA3]

Imo it may not take a lot of $ if they violated the election rules as someone stated above. It they did that and there is evidence it would never make it to the ballot. And the election board or whoever may investigate it for no cost, because they have to. Again, if there is evidence.

Sadly that would be the State investigating itself and the investigation would be run by the AG herself. I'm sure she will find evidence of her own wrongdoing...

 

[ilikegunspdx]

Sadly that would be the State investigating itself and the investigation would be run by the AG herself. I'm sure she will find evidence of her own wrongdoing...

No I don't think so. The ones taking the petitions would be the ones at fault if they broke the rules. The state is the one responsible for allowing or disallowing it on the ballot.

For example let's say a group on a completely different initiative falsified signatures. If someone gave the election board (or whatever governing body it is) evidence of that then that body would have to investigate and if it's true they would have to remove it from the ballot.

No egg on the state's face at all. In fact if they did not investigate it after being shown evidence they could be sued for wrongdoing and the people on that electoral board lose their jobs. That's the one thing the individual state employees fear most.

 

[Ura-Ki]

The problem is, the State Elections Board is under the authority of both the state A.G. and Sec-State, so, actually getting them to instigate a review is going to be a challenge!
If you could bring a case before the Supreme Court in this state, Maybe, but highly unlikely, as they are K8's shills and would act "For the good of the Children" and not the rights or law!

 

[ilikegunspdx]

The problem is, the State Elections Board is under the authority of both the state A.G. and Sec-State, so, actually getting them to instigate a review is going to be a challenge!
If you could bring a case before the Supreme Court in this state, Maybe, but highly unlikely, as they are K8's shills and would act "For the food of the Children" and not the rights or law!

If there was clear evidence the petition organizers broke the rules and the governing body did not investigate it or disallow the initiative on the ballot they could be held to account. That is the time to hire the lawyers. It would be a huge scandal and whoever suppressed the evidence would lose their jobs or worse. Again if there is evidence.

Such suppression could be avoided by giving the evidence to every available media outlet possible and keeping the pressure on until it is removed from the ballot. That way the body responsible for allowing initiatives can't try to hide what they are doing because there would be a million eye on them.

 

[Ura-Ki]

 

[AshWilliams]

Does anyone know what, if anything, the NRA, OFF, and OOC are doing to challenge this?

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

Does anyone know what, if anything, the NRA, OFF, and OOC are doing to challenge this?

I believe the NRA is sending out an urgent and very strongly worded fundraising letter with a limited time offer on a hat

 

[Pandaz3]

Does anyone know what, if anything, the NRA, OFF, and OOC are doing to challenge this?

NRA, nothing! Paper Tiger

 

[bkroger86]

We can also use our money to fight it the usual political way. We are at the beginning of the political campaign season

What you are describing is the NRA. Before they went bankrupt.

Politicians vote the way their donors want them to.

 

[Xaevian]

Politicians vote the way their donors want them to.

This, 100%. And to be clear, "donor" does NOT include the average citizen. Even more, the public support or lack of support has no bearing on whether laws get passed or not.
End of quote,
repeat the line.
...public support or lack of support has no bearing on whether laws get passed or not.

Lobbyists, special interests groups, and very wealthy donors determine whether a law will pass or not. That is why the attacks on the NRA was such a big deal for the 2A community, regardless of how you may personally feel about that org.