Oregon Poll: Poll: Should We Help Shape M114 Or Simply Hope The Lawsuits Will Be Successful In Overturning It?

[arakboss]

Thanks to @mhayd93 , @Lilhigbee , @PiratePast40 and others, I have realized it would be unhelpful to particpate in the shaping of Measure 114 as groups gather to finalize the regulations. I believe we want it to be as restrictive as possible so the courts are more likely to overturn it. This goes against my better judgement but I am going to trust the process and hope FPC, GAO or whoever challenges this measure in court, prevails.

There is a risk that if the courts don't overturn it or take their sweet time (years) to overturn it we will be living under the restrictions.

I am wondering how many members share my view of sitting back and observing the process as the Measure is tweaked by LEVO, Legislators and others and potentially becomes even more restrictive then how it is currently written?

Are there some members who think we should engage those parties who will be finalizing the Measure's language to help minimize the restrictions?

Read More

 

[ZigZagZeke]

The law says what it says. They don't get to rewrite it after it's voted on.

 

[arakboss]

The law says what it says. They don't get to rewrite it after it's voted on.

That's what I intially thought but it appears they may be able to tweak it in Salem before it hits the ORS. Also the majority party can make changes to this Measure in normal sessions as it is a Statutory Measure.

From Oregon Live article:

Lift Every Voice Oregon committee members are conferring with state lawmakers and state police on setting up a Measure 114 committee and workgroup to write the rules on everything from the information sought on permit application forms to the type of courses required for safety training.

The proponents' goal is to have a committee that includes a wide range of stakeholders.

Other issues to be decided: Whether state police need more employees to compile a database of those granted permits and others who are rejected; how much money or staff county sheriffs' offices will need to handle the permit process and what resources are needed to help state police do additional background checks for permit applicants.

"When you do something as comprehensive in terms of a new procedure, it's almost impossible to put it all in the statute," said Liz McKanna, a member of Lift Every Voice Oregon's legislative committee.

"Part of it is we also want input from the people who are going to be administering the permitting process," she said.

Sen. Floyd Prozanski, D-Eugene, who chairs the Senate's Judiciary Committee, said lawmakers still must work out a timeline and a process to assign various bills relating to Measure 114 to different committees.

Rep. Jason Kropf, D-Bend, who chairs the House Judiciary Committee, said he'll also be working with legislative counsel on next steps to implement the measure.

No dates are set yet.

 

[ZigZagZeke]

Just grounds for more lawsuits. Our only recourse now is suing them all the way to the USSC.

 

[Yarome]

Personally, I hightly doubt there is one single thing that could be done to have any impact whatsoever either way.

It's an absolute exercise in futility so the whole idea of us somehow being able to "smooth" out the transition and impact... or... somehow helping it to wreck itself even harder is an entirely moot point.

They're gonna do whatever they can get away with. They skewed the facts and controlled the narrative to get it passed... it's a fools notion to think they are suddenly going to stop now.

Energy is better spent challenging it and preparing for the next battle.

 

[arakboss]

Personally, I hightly doubt there is one single thing that could be done to have any impact whatsoever either way.

It's an absolute exercise in futility so the whole idea of us somehow being able to "smooth" out the transition and impact... or... somehow helping it to wreck itself even harder is an entirely moot point.

They're gonna do whatever they can get away with. They skewed the facts and controlled the narrative to get it passed... it's a fools notion to think they are suddenly going to stop now.

Energy is better spent challenging it and preparing for the next battle.

I'll chalk that down as a No

 

[TTSX]

If it's not bad enough, people will comply and wait for their next beating. If it's made bad enough, people might actually revolt, though I'm admittedly not too optimistic about that either

 

[Yarome]

I'll chalk that down as a No

Well yeah... I'm not saying "don't" proceed... I'm just saying that it's so poorly written that there may in fact be some room for interpretation and trying to suppose what the woketards had in mind when they wrote that might not be exactly what we would like it to. They might could very well say it only applies on federal land when in designated shooting areas. You "can" shoot elsewhere, but are limited to neutered mags. Who knows at this point?

I'm firmly in the camp that "recreational activity" includes me being able to go pop my rocks off with standard cap mags on federal land (where permitted) whenever I dang well feel like it. However, I also realize that the only thing that really matters is what the LEO on scene thinks it means at the time he's in front of me.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I also think that the chance of ever being in that position to begin with, that it would even matter, is highly unlikely to the extreme, anyway. All my years of regular shooting on public lands... outside of a game warden during hunting season... I've never once ever been approached by anyone in any official capacity. YMMV

 

[arakboss]

Personally, I hightly doubt there is one single thing that could be done to have any impact whatsoever either way.

It's an absolute exercise in futility so the whole idea of us somehow being able to "smooth" out the transition and impact... or... somehow helping it to wreck itself even harder is an entirely moot point.

They're gonna do whatever they can get away with. They skewed the facts and controlled the narrative to get it passed... it's a fools notion to think they are suddenly going to stop now.

Energy is better spent challenging it and preparing for the next battle.

My bet is that a motivated person or group could make Measure 114 and or the implementation of it worse than if they left it alone.

 

[Yarome]

My bet is that a motivated person or group could make Measure 114 and or the implementation of it worse than if they left it alone.

How exactly could a person or small group make the impact on the public worse? The law, regs and requirements will be whatever they make them so what are you suggesting? Form a group that will lobby for modifications to 114 to make it stricter and more infringing?

IE., Maybe push to get a law to limit how many rounds a person can carry in public at one time?

I don't get what is even being suggested or what could be done either way. What can be done to make the transition smoother? What can be done to make it worse and harder hitting on Oregonians?

 

[arakboss]

How exactly could a person or small group make the impact on the public worse? The law, regs and requirements will be whatever they make them so what are you suggesting? Form a group that will lobby for modifications to 114 to make it stricter and more infringing?

IE., Maybe push to get a law to limit how many rounds a person can carry in public at one time?

I don't get what is even being suggested or what could be done either way. What can be done to make the transition smoother? What can be done to make it worse and harder hitting on Oregonians?

The consensus so far is we want Measure 114 and it's implementation to be as bad as can be.

If somebody or some group did this:

"Form a group that will lobby for modifications to 114 to make it stricter and more infringing?"


They may very well be able to make Measure 114 worse for gun owners. We either want Measure 114 to be as bad for gun owners as it can be or we don't. So far 80% of votes in thread poll say as bad as can be.

 

[nehalemguy]

Do you actually think LEVO or the current party in charge in Salem is going to give us anything more than a token seat at the table? Even if they do, it will be a total FUDD like Monroe to represent "hunters".

When has any anti-gun group ever dealt in good faith with us?

-E-

 

[PiratePast40]

The self proclaimed, famous Oregon prosecutor, AKA Traffic Court Floyd, is the head of the committee. History has shown that he won't listen to anyone except his favorites and will do whatever possible to make a public hearing an exercise in futility. He's the guy that pushed for a 50 round live fire test, the same as Texas, as a part of the Oregon CHL process. If anyone thinks there is a chance of fair and equitable representation with regard to 114, they're delusional.

They whole thing is unconstitutional, it's not necessary to play in their litter box.

 

[arakboss]

Wanting Measure 114 to be as bad can be is overwhelmingly the consensus.

We do have one sovereign dictator onboard.

 

[Yarome]

I get it now. A purely hypothetical rhetorical discussion... not based on reality or actually "doing" anything pro or con with 114.

Simply a mental exercise... but it still seems like it would be more productive.. even as a mental exercise... if there where actually practical things that "might" be possibilities in reality. Otherwise it seems like a waste of bandwidth.

I thought it was a real discussion at first... my bad!

 

[CountryGent]

As far as I am concerned: by any (legal) means necessary. This is an egregious infringement on our liberties. That said, I think the courts are our only real hope. Sure, let's explore other means to go after this monstrosity, but I think legal action and getting it in the courts is the way to go. I'm not wildly optimistic about the lower courts, but the Supremes have taking on anti-2A laws lately (not the least of which Bruen), so it is possible they will again. They've also shown they are more than willing to take on some very contentious issues in American life, so it is at least possible they'd review (and boot) this affront to free men and women.

Beyond that, I think it is time to take a step back and take a good, hard look at how we are waging this fight. The fact this steaming pile of goat excrement even made it on the ballot, let alone voted into law, indicates we need to be doing something differently. And by "we" I mean both individually and the organizations that are supposed to be countering such things.

 

[PORSCHE928S4]

I am offended and will love to sue it should be a class action lawsuit we are all offended and identify as responsible gun owners period enough is enough !

 

[Ben B.]

No Quislings.

 

[PORSCHE928S4]

No Quislings.

I like where you are coming from but you know there will always be ONE and that is all we need !

 

[DCF]

Any and all gun laws are unconstitutional and therefore null and void. The magazine ban was already ruled unconstitutional and limiting the sale of firearms is also unconstitutional (both by the US constitution and Oregon's). in the long run, this "law" won't stand. If the the four counties in Oregon that voted this in wants it so bad, then let them have it, but all of the other counties that didn't, doesn't have to abide by it . That's the "democracy" that they so ignorantly think we have, democracy it nothing more than "mob rule". We live in a constitutional republic where our rights are protected by the constitution and we need to remind them of that fact. Put pressure on all of these bubblegum Clowns who call themselves or "representatives", email and contact the NRA and the GOA (the GOA has a better track record of fighting BS like this) and don't give up anything.