JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
When it comes to protecting gun rights, some here have advocated leaving the PNW for solid red states like ID, MT, TX, etc. I've noted before that those states are just a few steps behind places like the PNW as they are showing signs of turning blue themselves. I've even pondered if it isn't part of a plan to spread anti-gun culture across the US (among other things, but this is a gun site, so we'll stick with that topic).

Well guess what popped up on Twitter. A politician advocating groups of blue voters moving to red states to force a change in those states. My suspicion is confirmed. Not to say this is a huge coordinated event at this time, but be aware, no state out there is safe if the anti's think they can flip it for their cause. And they really only need about 51% to turn things around. Even in places like ID, MT and TX, we're seeing changes in certain areas.

Can we really run away to protect our rights? Or do we need to stay where we are and fight? Just something to think about. Maybe it won't affect you today, but 10 years from now, 20?

(@Joe Link I hope this thread is okay, I think it's important to discuss the changes in this country that will impact gun rights in states not just in the PNW, but around the country. Perhaps move to another area of the forum, if more appropriate)

Take a look at these:

View attachment 518711

View attachment 518712

View attachment 518713

View attachment 518714

View attachment 518715
I advocate the opposite of this approach with in our states. I am going to refer to people in my argument as pro gun or anti gun. We have a bunch of pro gun residents living in State house and Senate districts that will never be pro gun again. Think about all the little anti gun districts in the Portland Metro Area. We also have a number of Districts where the pro gun and anti gun population is evenly mixed. If the pro gun people currently living in solidly anti gun districts moved to the evenly split districts we might have a chance at a divided state government again. Unfortunately, I think the anti gunners are using this idea and strengthening their positions in the evenly split districts and slowly converting pro gun districts in to anti gun districts. Unless pro gun immigration vastly outnumbers anti gun immigration in to our state, pro gunners are going to be marginalized to the fringes. I am open to hearing why I am wrong about this but a look at the district voting patterns over the years will support my ideas.
 
Too much apathy to turn it around, 40 years of progressive beatdowns have NW conservatives staying low until they die or retire out of state.

At some point it becomes quality of life. With Oregon morphing into California, it is not just gun rights erroding. Its buying power, opportunity, and quality of life.

You need to make over 100k a year to realistically buy a home here now. So you can rent a house maybe, or be forced into ever more expensive apartments.

As people get tired of the squeeze of the city, the wealthier ones are moving outward, hoovering up affordable property in small towns, but bringing the same BS that they escaped from. The developers are literally doubling the sizes of some small towns. Can't fight that crap.

Californians have been fighting to keep or regain their rights for decades - the result is more oppression. Its coming here. Unless you are willing to flaunt the law and risk loosing it all, or to rally an armed march on Salem and use the guns to oust the politicians (never going to happen) - theres no fight to be fought. Washington has had the worst of its new gun laws put in place by popular vote in metro counties. Sound familiar? It. Is. Coming.

So one can stay, live by the lefts ever intolerant nonsense, or you can add a conservative vote elsewhere.

The thing with states like Texas, Montana, and Idaho is that the climates will keep a lot of urchins in check. You may be able to stay in Oregon and move to a rural eastern or southern county, but even there, State government minions have a presence.
You said "NW conservatives staying low until they die or retire out of state" and I agree with you. I also feel demographically there isn't a sufficient new group of pro gun kids in the future voter pipeline to outnumber the anti gun kids. This seems pretty evident when you look at the high levels of attendance by young people at anti gun rallies and you look at the absolutely pathetic level of resistance from young people when their gun rights are being violated, stomped on and dissolved by corporations, anti-gun masses and even by a number supposedly pro gun individuals.
 
I advocate the opposite of this approach with in our states. I am going to refer to people in my argument as pro gun or anti gun. We have a bunch of pro gun residents living in State house and Senate districts that will never be pro gun again. Think about all the little anti gun districts in the Portland Metro Area. We also have a number of Districts where the pro gun and anti gun population is evenly mixed. If the pro gun people currently living in solidly anti gun districts moved to the evenly split districts we might have a chance at a divided state government again. Unfortunately, I think the anti gunners are using this idea and strengthening their positions in the evenly split districts and slowly converting pro gun districts in to anti gun districts. Unless pro gun immigration vastly outnumbers anti gun immigration in to our state, pro gunners are going to be marginalized to the fringes. I am open to hearing why I am wrong about this but a look at the district voting patterns over the years will support my ideas.

It could work, for those who can do it. For many, not being close to a major metro area makes doing what they do for a living difficult, if not impossible. I can't leave where I'm at and still do the job I do, it's very specialized and only one company offers me a chance to do it. I can't live 2 hours out of Portland, unfortunately. When I retire, that could be an option, but not now. Like it or not, the work is in the big metro areas.

That said, if folks looked at the various representative and senate districts around the metro area (where the most reps come from based on population), then maybe if folks could cluster in some communities, they might be able to swing a few seats. And a few seats is all we would need to at least create a roadblock to new anti-gun legislation.

Where I live, in Clackamas County, we have 2 reps and 1 senator in Salem. They gerrymandered Clackamas County, the same area I live in, to align leftist voters, the ones closest to Multnomah County, into a single voting block. We flipped from 2 reliably R reps to 1 D and 1 R, and it's been that way ever since. And I think part of that are folks that simply don't bother to get out and vote. Clustering people together does little good for us when 50% of the people that could be on our side, refuse to even cast a vote.

In Oregon, representatives and senators are based on population. If you could put another 20,000 people, solidly pro-gun, into a middle of the road district, you might be able to swing that district. Or you could possibly grow a district larger so they have to, by state constitution, add another rep to that area. Again, what good is it if people can't be bothered to cast a simple mail-in ballot?

Honestly, if ALL R voters voted in every election, with full participation, we could easily change the course of this state in a significant way. Unfortunately too many simply don't care enough to do that. Apathy is killing us. The left in Oregon is far more motivated, far more willing to work together and far more set with their eyes on the goal of running this state in one particular direction. Our side just doesn't think, or work that way. I think they could, but it will take plenty of one on one work and engagement to try and get those folks to send in their ballots. My wife and I do that already. We know plenty of folks that don't bother to vote, and we're trying to encourage them to do so. This last election, we were able to convince several folks to cast their first ever ballots. It's changes like that that can help swing things, eventually. But we also have to be willing to think long term, because our opposition does just that. Too many folks see one, two elections go the way they don't like and just give up. I won't do that. And I will continue to encourage others not to give up either. Political landscapes can swing, both ways.
 
It could work, for those who can do it. For many, not being close to a major metro area makes doing what they do for a living difficult, if not impossible. I can't leave where I'm at and still do the job I do, it's very specialized and only one company offers me a chance to do it. I can't live 2 hours out of Portland, unfortunately. When I retire, that could be an option, but not now. Like it or not, the work is in the big metro areas.

That said, if folks looked at the various representative and senate districts around the metro area (where the most reps come from based on population), then maybe if folks could cluster in some communities, they might be able to swing a few seats. And a few seats is all we would need to at least create a roadblock to new anti-gun legislation.

Where I live, in Clackamas County, we have 2 reps and 1 senator in Salem. They gerrymandered Clackamas County, the same area I live in, to align leftist voters, the ones closest to Multnomah County, into a single voting block. We flipped from 2 reliably R reps to 1 D and 1 R, and it's been that way ever since. And I think part of that are folks that simply don't bother to get out and vote. Clustering people together does little good for us when 50% of the people that could be on our side, refuse to even cast a vote.

In Oregon, representatives and senators are based on population. If you could put another 20,000 people, solidly pro-gun, into a middle of the road district, you might be able to swing that district. Or you could possibly grow a district larger so they have to, by state constitution, add another rep to that area. Again, what good is it if people can't be bothered to cast a simple mail-in ballot?

Honestly, if ALL R voters voted in every election, with full participation, we could easily change the course of this state in a significant way. Unfortunately too many simply don't care enough to do that. Apathy is killing us. The left in Oregon is far more motivated, far more willing to work together and far more set with their eyes on the goal of running this state in one particular direction. Our side just doesn't think, or work that way. I think they could, but it will take plenty of one on one work and engagement to try and get those folks to send in their ballots. My wife and I do that already. We know plenty of folks that don't bother to vote, and we're trying to encourage them to do so. This last election, we were able to convince several folks to cast their first ever ballots. It's changes like that that can help swing things, eventually. But we also have to be willing to think long term, because our opposition does just that. Too many folks see one, two elections go the way they don't like and just give up. I won't do that. And I will continue to encourage others not to give up either. Political landscapes can swing, both ways.
I'm in 100% agreement with all your thoughts here.
 
Sadly, pro-gun conservatives are in fact becoming a dying breed. Which is weird because pro-gun folks are the heroes in every movie and in real life. I digress.

The GOP better wake up and dial back illegal immigration, voter fraud, and build the wall immediately. The left has had and been winning a long-game of importing impoverished 3rd world illegals who rely on big government and who come from anti-gun home nations where gun ownership was illegal and rare. The demographic shifts are obvious looking back 20 years, and will continue to get worse for pro-gun conservatives, not better. Trump's election in 2016 was an miracle, and fluke, and probably stalled the demise of conservative values for maybe a generation. But we cannot sit back and relax. We avoided a knockout blow, barely, but there's a haymaker in the works if we don't see it and block it.

If pro gun conservatives don't get off their couches and vote, we will continue to lose rights and once lost they require heavy lifting to restore. Every single one of you/us must get every person we know to the polls and vote pro-gun red. As others pointed out, a huge block of gun owners don't vote. It's self defeating.
 
They have the schools and they have the media. Right now that's all they really need.

Speaking of schools, earlier in the thread it was mentioned that minorities vote liberal. Look at the demographics of your local school district and that will tell you where your local population is headed. I am not being racist here, just pointing out the fact that a school district is a good snapshot of the community as a whole.

Conservative whites are now a minority in many areas. I don't care what color your skin is, but I do care what your political leanings are. So the premise may be switching around that the majority now votes liberal. Not much chance of that changing any time so, so the cut and run idea is pretty good.

You young guys are going to have to deal with this sh*t, us old guys are just going to die our way out of the problem.
 
If pro gun conservatives don't get off their couches and vote, we will continue to lose rights and once lost they require heavy lifting to restore.

Once lost they will never be restored until there is a need for a revolution similar to what happened in 1778. Taken us 242 years to get to this point, so it will be our unborn great grand childrens problem to deal with.
 
You all are beating the crap out of a dead horse!! As long as the other side keeps coming together to fight as one and we don't no state is safe! It is just a matter of time. PLAIN AND SIMPLE!!
 
I'm looking pretty hard at a long-term move, and in the running are AZ, UT, WY, OK, TX, and ID. Each has significant pros and not many cons. My real concern about AZ and TX is they are nearly purple and moving there might mean another move again in a few years to flee that state. The border issue and immigration can be a real potential problem too in the near future. And AZ and TX have drought issues or vulnerability. Other states are mostly positive, some negatives. But if I could magically transport I would escape the PNW. It's going to take a lot of work, time, and money unfortunately - making all of us direct victims of liberalism leftist locusts.
Utah sucks donkey dongs
Trust me
 
I'm looking pretty hard at a long-term move, and in the running are AZ, UT, WY, OK, TX, and ID. Each has significant pros and not many cons. My real concern about AZ and TX is they are nearly purple and moving there might mean another move again in a few years to flee that state. The border issue and immigration can be a real potential problem too in the near future. And AZ and TX have drought issues or vulnerability. Other states are mostly positive, some negatives. But if I could magically transport I would escape the PNW. It's going to take a lot of work, time, and money unfortunately - making all of us direct victims of liberalism leftist locusts.
Moved to OK a year and a half ago.
 
The reality is, and lets be honest most people even gun owners simply are content to have a firearm even with huge limitations and even if they don't. Well there is nothing they can do about it. The time to do something came and past.
You guys all know I give OFF and the NRA crap, and I do so with good reason. I think, they like our rights at risk. I say this based on my interaction with both OFF and the NRA, where I saw first hand them back down and let laws pass by.

What is my point? The reality is even our own lobbyists gave up on the fight in the west long ago, and now just keep publicly opposing and name calling, so they can keep those donations coming, all the while doing as little as they can, and just enough to keep us on the hook.

This goes so much deeper then this website allows to talk about, so of course the discussion seems outta place and hopeless.

So is there hope? Yes, but until individuals and sites like NWFA and many others are willing to get their feet wet the discussions will never mean much more then just talk.

DH
 
Any further clarification? Been there several times and loved it.
Oh it's provably top 5 most beautiful states out there. Great hunting. Great outdoors everything. But I also went to college there and worked after college for 2 years in salt lake.
Issues
1. Religion. If you ain't LDS, traditionally you are treated like outsiders. And I'm LDS. It's ridiculous.
2. Salt lake ain't republican anymore. In fact it's major league liberal. Most don't know that.
3. Major population growth. If you live there, try southern Utah. If you have to live somewhat close to salt lake, look up around Coalville or Francis or Heber city.
4. A small home is 2,500 feet. A 3,000 foot home is nice size in most states. Not Utah. Larger homes are 6,500 feet. And there's thousands of them.
5. HUGE bankruptcy state.
6. Major teen suicide issues. Teen boys.
7. Rx drug abuse. Big meth issues in smaller towns.
 
What is my point? The reality is even our own lobbyists gave up on the fight in the west long ago, and now just keep publicly opposing and name calling, so they can keep those donations coming, all the while doing as little as they can, and just enough to keep us on the hook.

This. Like most non profits and special interest groups the focus is on keeping the kingdom and fiefdom of the Executive Directors, the lobbyists and staff employed and well paid, because even if the cause fails, they keep their jobs and don't have to do jack sh*t, and they can eject without penalty.
 
Oh it's provably top 5 most beautiful states out there. Great hunting. Great outdoors everything. But I also went to college there and worked after college for 2 years in salt lake.
Issues
1. Religion. If you ain't LDS, traditionally you are treated like outsiders. And I'm LDS. It's ridiculous.
2. Salt lake ain't republican anymore. In fact it's major league liberal. Most don't know that.
3. Major population growth. If you live there, try southern Utah. If you have to live somewhat close to salt lake, look up around Coalville or Francis or Heber city.
4. A small home is 2,500 feet. A 3,000 foot home is nice size in most states. Not Utah. Larger homes are 6,500 feet. And there's thousands of them.
5. HUGE bankruptcy state.
6. Major teen suicide issues. Teen boys.
7. Rx drug abuse. Big meth issues in smaller towns.


I have no problem or quarrel with religious people and frankly I hope my neighbors have good values and keep riff raff out of the area. Utah is probably going to be one of the last states to fall blue IMO, but it did just elect a Dem so I see the point. Seems the disease of liberalism is spreading far and wide. Population growth is everywhere. I like big houses. Folks have financial problems and suicides and drug use in every state - nowhere is immune.

I see nothing so far turning me off to Utah.
 
I have no problem or quarrel with religious people and frankly I hope my neighbors have good values and keep riff raff out of the area. Utah is probably going to be one of the last states to fall blue IMO, but it did just elect a Dem so I see the point. Seems the disease of liberalism is spreading far and wide. Population growth is everywhere. I like big houses. Folks have financial problems and suicides and drug use in every state - nowhere is immune.

I see nothing so far turning me off to Utah.
Good luck!
You will love all the fake boobs down there. Lots of fake there..
 

Upcoming Events

Tillamook Gun & Knife Show
Tillamook, OR
"The Original" Kalispell Gun Show
Kalispell, MT
Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR
Kids Firearm Safety 2 Class
Springfield, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top