Oregon OSP response on 114 part deux

[Ura-Ki]

I was also confused by how she was asking questions. It seemed to me that she was asking the defense for advice on how to rule. In retrospect, it now looks as though she was asking them to justify their positions from a legal position with regards to past decisions. Not sure why she was pressing John Kaempf about armor piercing and poison bullets. I believe he answered correctly when saying armor piercing should be legal. I get that she was pressing for dangerous and unusual, just don't understand why she kept pressing for his position.

I'm on the fence with her. Part of me says she agrees this is a farce, and is making it so any Portland (LEVO) idiot can understand things from a legal standpoint, so they don't try Stupid again! The other part of me says she is NOT a gun person, and is asking what to you and I seem like stupid questions, the kind of questions our wives would ask if they are not shooters! Maybe she is a flaming liberal, or maybe she is a lot more savvy then we think, or maybe she is a total idiot, don't know at this point! I will wait and see, and be surprised like the rest of you!
I like how she started down the two step balancing route and Kemph absolutely shut her down hard! Ether she knew full well and was testing him, and making the point, or were totally screwed. Me thinks it's the first, as she didn't strike back, or admonish him in court!
I also love the part where the State claimed in open court, ON RECORD, that OSP would have the permit system up and running, and the entire courtroom laughed their arses off, that sends a powerful message, and the Judge allowed it to go on!

I did as well.

Same here!

 

[PiratePast40]

....I also love the part where the State claimed in open court, ON RECORD, that OSP would have the permit system up and running, and the entire courtroom laughed their arses off, that sends a powerful message, and the Judge allowed it to go on!

Looking back, I believe he actually said that people would be able to apply for a permit, not that the system would be ready. He wouldn't add anything else about satisfying the training or demonstration portions, nor did he say people could actually obtain a permit on the 8th.

I was also surprised the judge didn't say anything when people were laughing. I expected to hear a gavel and be admonished.

 

[Ura-Ki]

Looking back, I believe he actually said that people would be able to apply for a permit, not that the system would be ready. He wouldn't add anything else about satisfying the training or demonstration portions, nor did he say people could actually obtain a permit on the 8th.

I was also surprised the judge didn't say anything when people were laughing. I expected to hear a gavel and be admonished.

This tells us something important! I too was VERY surprised the Judge allowed the laughter ( was also VERY surprised she took the admonishment and didn't react, or sanction our side) I also doubt she will consider the OSP statements as relevant, she has to know it's a fools errand to have any part of the system up and running in time, AND, I think she is playing it cool, to allow our side to articulate those points as a matter of Court Record!

 

[dinky450]

because the Left is always far more organized than the Right..... they got signatures to pass a measure. I've never seen gun advocates get together backed by gun companies to push a measure through..

Yes but we need to start or we will lose everything.

 

[Librarian]

Dude, her statements are very wishy washy. And I would have expected better from a sitting judge who has all the information in front of her there isn't anything to think about and her stalling till Tuesday at the latest is a clearly sign of bubblegumery

We'll see next week, but I do not think she is 'stalling'. I'd rather she has time to write a solid opinion supporting whatever way she rules.

Remember, this ruling is (supposed to be) on the preliminary injunction - either way it is not the end of the cases and whichever way it goes next week, expect the 'losing' party to appeal to the 9th Circuit.

 

[PiratePast40]

We'll see next week, but I do not think she is 'stalling'. I'd rather she has time to write a solid opinion supporting whatever way she rules.

Remember, this ruling is (supposed to be) on the preliminary injunction - either way it is not the end of the cases and whichever way it goes next week, expect the 'losing' party to appeal to the 9th Circuit.

She did say that the case was complicated and that she needed to study past decisions for relevance before handing down a decision.

 

[156256Hunter]

Hopefully she or her clerk doesn't read some of the posts in these threads or she may rule for the State

 

[Jay Walk]

Good point,

You can debate the law all you want but Oregon does not care about the Constitution and whether or not the Gun Control measures violate it.

 

[ronin223]

Lol....speaking of not paying attention. The IRS angle was tried two plus years ago when this crap initiative petition first surfaced. Many of us here at NWFA filed complaints (myself included) with the IRS. After that Knutson and the rest of the ilk formed LEVO to separate the activities and finances from the church.

-E-

What are you talking about. Paying attention was about the judge. Relax francis

 

[NeoBlackdog]

She did say that the case was complicated and that she needed to study past decisions for relevance before handing down a decision.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

There's her friggin' 'past decisions'.

 

[ronin223]

I did as well.

I suspect reporting to the irs would be a waste of time. In jan we should know who is sitting on which committees. A pro gun republican on the house ways committee may be the best way to do this. That was what i ment.

 

[ronin223]

We'll see next week, but I do not think she is 'stalling'. I'd rather she has time to write a solid opinion supporting whatever way she rules.

Remember, this ruling is (supposed to be) on the preliminary injunction - either way it is not the end of the cases and whichever way it goes next week, expect the 'losing' party to appeal to the 9th Circuit.

If there is an injunction she is stating OFF has footing that their lawsuit has merit. If no injunction, then she is signaling OFF is off their rocker and has no merit.

So while the case does not end this Tuesday we know we will have an uphill battle and may ultimately lose if there is no injunction on magazines

 

[156256Hunter]

If there is an injunction she is stating OFF has footing that their lawsuit has merit. If no injunction, then she is signaling OFF is off their rocker and has no merit.

So while the case does not end this Tuesday we know we will have an uphill battle and may ultimately lose if there is no injunction on magazines

If she denies an injunction she's saying she doesn't think OFF is "likely" to succeed on the merits. Different than "no merit"

 

[Librarian]

If she denies an injunction she's saying she doesn't think OFF is "likely" to succeed on the merits. Different than "no merit"

That, or does not think allowing the law to take effect creates 'irreparable harm'.

 

[tkdguy]

Do I understand this correctly, that if you go the "permit to purchase route" OSP has the right to publish your name, etc. for the public?

 

[Ura-Ki]

Do I understand this correctly, that if you go the "permit to purchase route" OSP has the right to publish your name, etc. for the public?

YUP, and as we see in Kali, that can and WILL be abused to no end!