Oregon SB 348 gutted and stuffed to rewrite Measure 114 3/34/23

[Librarian]

I hear ya... but... Such behavior is legal until it isn't, and never was illegal because the (unconstitutional) provisions were enjoined by J. Raschio and as such never were 'constitutionally effective.' That said, it's all a steaming pile of bull manure...

No, no, completely different spheres of law - following constitutional processes to add ballot-measure laws is a necessary precondition for Judge Raschio to issue an injunction. Raschio did not enjoin the Secretary of State or any state office from performing the duties of adding the laws to the ORS.

 

[Ura-Ki]

How in hell can this even stand, especially when it's under TRO?

 

[PiratePast40]

SB 527, allowing age discrimination without fear of lawsuit passed out of committee with the -1 ammendment:

SB 527-2 (LC 638) 3/30/23 (JAS/ps) Requested by Senator SMITH DB PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO SENATE BILL 527 On page 1 of the printed bill, line 2, after "accommodation" insert a period and delete the rest of the line and line 3. Delete lines 5 throchool district may contract with an outside entity to develop the curriculum or provide the instruction described in this secugh 29 and delete page 2 and insert: "SECTION 1. (1) The Department of Education shall by rule develop a firearm safety education curriculum for students in grades 7 through 9 who are between 12 and 15 years of age. "(2) Each school district shall ensure that students described in subsection (1) of this section receive instruction in accordance with the firearm safety education curriculum described in subsection (1) of this section. "(3) The department or a stion."

 

[PiratePast40]

SB 348 carried over until tomorrow. Work sessions scheduled for 1 and 5 pm. If scheduled for 5pm, any members here willing to go and sit in on the work session?

 

[ilikegunspdx]

How in hell can this even stand, especially when it's under TRO?

The bill repeals m114 before replacing it. So any injunctions or lawsuits would be null and void I would think cuz no more m114. As I said earlier all the $ and time spent fighting m114 is lost and would have to start all over again. Having to do it in Marion county though that's a major issue. Don't know how that can be resolved.

 

[solv3nt]

The bill repeals m114 before replacing it. So any injunctions or lawsuits would be null and void I would think cuz no more m114. As I said earlier all the $ and time spent fighting m114 is lost and would have to start all over again. Having to do it in Marion county though that's a major issue. Don't know how that can be resolved.

I honestly don't know, so I'm asking. Does it matter if the bill was repealed? Isn't the lawsuit against what's written in the ORS as opposed to ip114? Or is the lawsuit targeting ip114?

 

[ilikegunspdx]

I honestly don't know, so I'm asking. Does it matter if the bill was repealed? Isn't the lawsuit against what's written in the ORS as opposed to ip114? Or is the lawsuit targeting ip114?

Seems to me if the law is gone no injunctions or lawsuits regarding the law can proceed. The new one is a different law if m114 is repealed it seems to me. Guess it's a question for lawyers?

 

[PiratePast40]

In addition to the magazine ban, looks like the 72 hour hold will also go into effect immediately if this passes.

 

[PiratePast40]

OFF Alert:
https://www.oregonfirearms.org/gun-ban-moved-back-again

04.03.2023

SB 348 has been pushed back one more day.

No explanation was given today for the delay in the scheduled work session. But every day it does not advance is another day to keep up the pressure on Knopp and Iverson to stand up and stop this insanity.

SB 527, which enshrines discrimination into Oregon statutes, did pass out of committee with Republicans Kim Thatcher and Dennis Linthicum voting no.

The bill would allow gun dealers to refuse service to anyone under 21.

The Democrats are demanding this because they are the party of "equity and inclusiveness ", unless their native bigotry can be applied with the force of law to gun owners.

They are also working overtime to expand the rights of "doctors" to sexually mutilate children without their parent's consent. So, a 15 year old can have her breasts removed but a 20 year old cannot buy a rifle. In other Democrat proposals a 16 year old will be able to vote, but a 19 year old will be denied the ability to buy reloading equipment.

After the vote, Senator James Manning shared a rambling and incoherent diatribe insulting and attacking gun owners. At least we think that's what he did. We could make no sense of it.

Senators Thatcher and Linthicum also served notice of a possible minority report. A minority report is an alternative bill offered in place of the existing legislation. While any alternative bill will have no chance in a legislature controlled by deceitful bigots, it was a welcomed statement.

Please continue to demand that the leaders of the Republican caucuses stand up to these demented attacks on your rights.

Senator Tim Knopp

503-986-1727

Representative Vikki Breese Iverson

503-986-1459

 

[CZP07]

I'm still trying to figure out how they plan on sending fingerprints for the application for the PTP to the FBI for a BGC when the FBI said 'No, Thank you'. Didn't they?
And if the Feebs do the BGC, that's the speed of the ATF approving an NFA

 

[Ura-Ki]

Seems to me if the law is gone no injunctions or lawsuits regarding the law can proceed. The new one is a different law if m114 is repealed it seems to me. Guess it's a question for lawyers?

This is how WE all got the Bruen decision in the first place, NEW YORK had withdrawn it's law to try and prevent SCOTUS review, which backfired on them, and we got Bruen to really twist the screws on the Anti's!

 

[Librarian]

The bill repeals m114 before replacing it. So any injunctions or lawsuits would be null and void I would think cuz no more m114. As I said earlier all the $ and time spent fighting m114 is lost and would have to start all over again. Having to do it in Marion county though that's a major issue. Don't know how that can be resolved.

It repeals parts, not the whole thing.

-3 says

"SECTION 1. (1) Section 1, chapter 1, Oregon Laws 2023 (Ballot
Measure 114 (2022)), is repealed.
"(2) Section 10, chapter 1, Oregon Laws 2023 (Ballot Measure 114
(2022)), is repealed.

 

[ilikegunspdx]

It repeals parts, not the whole thing.

-3 says

"SECTION 1. (1) Section 1, chapter 1, Oregon Laws 2023 (Ballot
Measure 114 (2022)), is repealed.
"(2) Section 10, chapter 1, Oregon Laws 2023 (Ballot Measure 114
(2022)), is repealed.

Thx I thought it repealed the whole thing.

 

[Ura-Ki]

It repeals parts, not the whole thing.

-3 says

"SECTION 1. (1) Section 1, chapter 1, Oregon Laws 2023 (Ballot
Measure 114 (2022)), is repealed.
"(2) Section 10, chapter 1, Oregon Laws 2023 (Ballot Measure 114
(2022)), is repealed.

Then,......................The TRO should not only remain in place as is, it should also extend to this newest B.S. as well, should only require Judge Reshio to extend things to cover this new Bullsh!t from our states anti rights representatives!

 

[JJE76]

I would go after this bill as a tax. The fee they are purposing is nothing more then a tax, if that's the case they aren't allowed to pass a tax by a simple one vote majority.

 

[The Heretic]

So can SB348 be enjoined, or will a new lawsuit be necessary?

So why hasn't other states (e.g., Calif) prosecuted those people who broke the law while an injunction was in force, and the injunction was later removed?

 

[Rem700..300]

Emailed both my Senator(Gesler) and Knopp. It was hard to just stay on 348 topic with how this State is going but managed to keep it on topic. Will be funny to see if I fall off the blessed list of instant approval people with email submitted. Fortunally I am happy with my collection. Another Python could tempt me though.

 

[Librarian]

So why hasn't other states (e.g., Calif) prosecuted those people who broke the law while an injunction was in force, and the injunction was later removed?

Injunction is still in place.

 

[Rockcrawler]

Whether 114/SB348 is ex post facto or not, I'd be puzzled as to why big box stores (such as Sportsman's Warehouse), large online retailers (MidWay-who started selling again, Brownells, Palmetto, etc.) with teams of lawyers, and Oregon FFL's would continue to sell magazines/do 3-day releases if they knowingly could be retroactively prosecuted.

 

[Librarian]

Whether 114/SB348 is ex post facto or not, I'd be puzzled as to why big box stores (such as Sportsman's Warehouse), large online retailers (MidWay-who started selling again, Brownells, Palmetto, etc.) with teams of lawyers, and Oregon FFL's would continue to sell magazines/do 3-day releases if they could be knowingly retroactively prosecuted.

I concur.

Were they to be convicted of such, BATFE would likely pull their licenses for failure to follow local laws. That's a pretty severe penalty, so I'm sure they have assessed their risk very carefully.

But there are always unpleasant surprises possible.