Oregon Panic buy before the 31st?

[Member 24198]

Yea i was gunna order a ak101 from psa and a mac 1014 from somewhere

Are you going to get a permit to purchase? Are you ok with walking away from the purchase of you don't?

 

[TTSX]

Quit being a pansy and hit the order button

 

[ilikegunspdx]

Yea i was gunna order a ak101 from psa and a mac 1014 from somewhere

For palmetto I would say "when the music's over turn out the lights"

View: https://youtu.be/nOJSmXSFCWk?si=ubb-7NAGfLaI7jzF

But who knows what will actually happen on the 29th (or some days after).

 

[JRuby]

So tomorrow is 10/30 can you still buy a gun in Oregon and what do I have to do to do so now?

 

[ilikegunspdx]

So tomorrow is 10/30 can you still buy a gun in Oregon and what do I have to do to do so now?

Nothing changes (potentially I mean, it may not change if we win) until appeals court rules.

 

[JRuby]

I was thinking about buying another 30-06 - yeah like I really need another one. Just was curious where we stood. Did not want to buy if 114 was going to shut it down.

 

[Tht_guy_josh]

Any updates was the arguments today?

 

[Omni]

Any updates was the arguments today?

https://oregoncourts.mediasite.com/...ault/watch/0c96fdeaf26c44c9aaa42e84a0f83dbc1d

 

[Nick Burkhardt]

"The Court of Appeals will almost certainly not be a quick decision. There's a 6-day trial to pour through, an enormous documentary record, a long opinion, and two/three separate issues (depending on who wins what argument). There's also the chance that it gets remanded for a new trial. We can hold this thing off, but we need support in finances, prayer, and messaging. Even post opinion, there's a minimum 30-day wait for the losing side to decide whether or not they appeal."

Does that mean stayed for another 30 days after the decision?

 

[ilikegunspdx]

https://oregoncourts.mediasite.com/...ault/watch/0c96fdeaf26c44c9aaa42e84a0f83dbc1d

Thank you! Finally someone post a link that actually works. Kudos!

 

[Nick Burkhardt]

Links were working, Oregon just did not have the bandwidth to accommodate all users at once.

 

[command_liner]

I was there today but had to leave early, as my wife had surgery today. In fact I was there first, at least for our side, and spoke with our council for a while. We all had to go through the metal detector and then walked up to the 3rd floor. The new multi-story sculpture exemplifying the state's motto was interesting, but not my favorite. This sculpture fills the hallway just outside the court's door.

The court -- apparently -- gave up on the idea of remote argument. Our council was there, as was the state's. We all started 35 minutes late compared to the published schedule. Then the timelines of "15 minutes each" were immediately and thoroughly ignored.

The state's presentation was first, and had lots of a-historic distortions, ignored common sense, Heller and Bruen. Lots of the sort of interest balancing blather that the USSC has prohibited, but peppered with discussions about the applicability of Oregon Art. 1, Section 27, and the nature of the Facial challenge.

A few more rounds explaining how the historic comparison to 1859 was key, and so was the concept of more than 10 rounds per magazine. The state presented false argument about the difficulty of loading a Colt 1851 revolver. (I think the state's presenter should be disbarred for flat-out lying in court on technical points that should not have been discussed.)

The state then switched to the lethality of the Las Vegas shooting, where one gunman killed many people in a short time with large capacity magazines. This got a few minutes discussion. [As it happens, I was at that event, just across the street at the MGM with my wife and two children. We were at the Mandalay Bay earlier in the day while the shooter was bringing in weapons. Our room at the MGM overlooked the shooting site, and a round could have come through our window.] The state's presentation ignored other forms of arms that discharge lots of projectiles (cannon, blunderbus, etc) and was somewhat disjointed.

I had to leave just as our side started presentation and will watch it all. You can see me leave at 21:18

Overall the state presented a fog of lies and completely ignored the obvious meaning of the state and federal constitutions, but instead mentioned "Public Safety" dozens of times.

 

[ilikegunspdx]

I was there today but had to leave early, as my wife had surgery today. In fact I was there first, at least for our side, and spoke with our council for a while. We all had to go through the metal detector and then walked up to the 3rd floor. The new multi-story sculpture exemplifying the state's motto was interesting, but not my favorite. This sculpture fills the hallway just outside the court's door.

The court -- apparently -- gave up on the idea of remote argument. Our council was there, as was the state's. We all started 35 minutes late compared to the published schedule. Then the timelines of "15 minutes each" were immediately and thoroughly ignored.

The state's presentation was first, and had lots of a-historic distortions, ignored common sense, Heller and Bruen. Lots of the sort of interest balancing blather that the USSC has prohibited, but peppered with discussions about the applicability of Oregon Art. 1, Section 27, and the nature of the Facial challenge.

A few more rounds explaining how the historic comparison to 1859 was key, and so was the concept of more than 10 rounds per magazine. The state presented false argument about the difficulty of loading a Colt 1851 revolver. (I think the state's presenter should be disbarred for flat-out lying in court on technical points that should not have been discussed.)

The state then switched to the lethality of the Las Vegas shooting, where one gunman killed many people in a short time with large capacity magazines. This got a few minutes discussion. [As it happens, I was at that event, just across the street at the MGM with my wife and two children. We were at the Mandalay Bay earlier in the day while the shooter was bringing in weapons. Our room at the MGM overlooked the shooting site, and a round could have come through our window.] The state's presentation ignored other forms of arms that discharge lots of projectiles (cannon, blunderbus, etc) and was somewhat disjointed.

I had to leave just as our side started presentation and will watch it all.

Overall the state presented a fog of lies and completely ignored the obvious meaning of the state and federal constitutions, but instead mentioned "Public Safety" dozens of times.

I think it will all come down to judges personal bias first, and the legal point about should "fact finding" be allowed second.

State says none of the fact finding in Raschio's ruling is relevant. We say it is all relevant. IMO the answer to that question will determine the legal basis of the appeal. But the judge's personal bias will likely determine the outcome. Judges who know nothing about guns have a very bad track record in 2A cases (immergut is one of countless examples). Judges who are familiar with guns have a good track record (Benitez and raschio are examples). A generalization of course.

 

[TTSX]

I'm panic buying a bucket of tar and a pillow of feathers

 

[P7M13]

Wasn't a panic buy, but just picked up a cherry Browning A5 Magnum with 28" & 32" barrels.
I'll do the BGC tomorrow.
Edit to add -- think I just got my "steal of the century". I figured 70's vintage because of the "made in Belgium" marks. The serial number says it's a 1958. I thought it was much newer because of the condition of the barrels, receiver and friction rings. I think it was a hardly shot safe queen.

 

[Bolt_308]

I may or may not have (but definitely did) just buy 16 rd mags for a gun I dont own yet just now . . .

 

[TTSX]

And here I am buying a gun with 10 and 12 round mags looking at offloading the 12 rounder because I wouldn't want it even without 114. everyone's gotta be different

 

[Bolt_308]

And here I am buying a gun with 10 and 12 round mags looking at offloading the 12 rounder because I wouldn't want it even without 114. everyone's gotta be different

You are doing it backwards . . .

 

[TTSX]

You are doing it backwards . . .

Not with this gun. It's very small and the "big" mags defeat the purpose in my eyes. Hopefully the other guy who bought the same thing (both of us are picking up tomorrow) will trade me straight across and everyone will get that they want

 

[1911Fanatic]

Wasn't a "Panic" purchase, but I did place an order for 8 more mags today. 3 were 33 round Glock mags, which I wanted a few extras of for a PCC I want to get next year, just in case. And they were on sale for 15 bucks a piece.

Then I bought 3 ten rounders for my Glock 19X, but not because of M114. I bought them because I will be traveling between Oregon and Washington and they have a 10 round limit.

I also bought two mags for my Beretta 21 A at a decent price. The order won't ship for a day or two. And If they decide that they can't ship them, no biggie. But, we won't have a ruling in the next week anyway I'm pretty sure.

I was cleaning house a couple of days ago, and going through boxes that I haven't looked inside of in 15 years. I found a bunch of magazines for guns that I don't even have anymore, and likely never will again. I might be able to trade them for mags that I could use or for ammo, or such.