The way we can EFFECTIVELY fight measure 114

[tkdguy]

As you wrote, a financial donation to whomever takes on this case. It's gonna take money, a whole lotta spending money …

I'll support OFF,

 

[_Will_]

I think at some point people will just disregard these laws, in a state that wanted heavily defunded police.There has to be enforcers. The only mechanism effected will be the " Permit to purchase" system. Many people will carry high capacity mags as before and not care. Unless Oregon hires a small army to enforce these laws at the state level. Not much will change.

Then you have Sheriff's openly stating they wont enforce it and great Idaho movement taking off.

 

[NewWind]

Could gun store owners and employees launch some sort of combined lawsuit against the state due to the loss of business/income that would occur while setting up the systems to be able to continue selling guns? Im not a lawyer so idk if that would be a class action or just then funding the court case or whatever, but that seems like one way to go about this. Should at least be able to get a stay against the law until the new system is up and running. Maybe more could be done with that too, idk.

 

[dancinghippos]

Kali has been fighting this kind of crap legislation for decades, it's been like a tennis match for them with the ball bounced court to court. The fights on here but the left is seeing weakness and will pass more legislation. Folks could have won this fight right away by voting out the dems but instead just like kali the same outcome is guaranteed unless you vote out the gun grabbers.

Dem legislators know they are fighting with taxpayer money. 2A advocates are fighting with their own money. We have to convince normal people that the right to have means of self protection is critical to their future.

 

[Andy54Hawken]

Something to consider here with folks who aren't gun owners....
Is that they get most of their firearm "knowledge" and the like from other non-gun people.
Things like movies and TV ....as well as political ads and the like.
So....
They may actually believe all the misinformation about firearms.

The popularity of AR type rifles and other "tactical" type firearms...along with a bias and false preconceived notion of such firearms and those who own them... Are scary to some people.
The abundance of postings here on the forum about self defense can be a turn off for some folks as well.

Now....don't get me wrong here...
I think that one should be able to own whatever firearms you like , without having to provide a need or reason , other than 'cause you like 'em and want to own them.
Nor am I against self defense or firearms that are very useful for that purpose.

I am saying that how you approach non gun people is critical in gaining their support.
And that limiting your conversation with them to self defense is just that ....limiting.
'Course any of the above only works if they are receptive to a different viewpoint.
Andy

 

[taku1946]

I agree.

I also believe that we need to take into account the performance of "said groups" in the last few months leading up to Tuesday. Dropping off a few signs and then asking for more money doesn't cut in a fight against "The most restrictive anti-gun rights bill in the country".
Accountability not blank checks

KEVIN AND OFF HAVE NOT HAD ENOUGH DONATIONS. COURT FIGHT COST AN ARM AND A LEG AND THE LEFT SCUM IS FED BY SOROS. YOU ALL ARE THE SUPPLY FOR OFF and KEVIN IS A FIGHTER. THERE IS NO SOROS DOING IT ON THE RIGHT.
ITS ALL OF YOU THAT MUST MAKE A CHOICE, JUST SAYIN.

 

[Ura-Ki]

KEVIN AND OFF HAVE NOT HAD ENOUGH DONATIONS. COURT FIGHT COST AN ARM AND A LEG AND THE LEFT SCUM IS FED BY SOROS. YOU ALL ARE THE SUPPLY FOR OFF and KEVIN IS A FIGHTER. THERE IS NO SOROS DOING IT ON THE RIGHT.
ITS ALL OF YOU THAT MUST MAKE A CHOICE, JUST SAYIN.

Unfortunatly, Keven isn't a very helpful/useful asset Now, his efforts are best used BEFORE any infringements, Not after!

 

[ilikegunspdx]

Unfortunatly, Keven isn't a very helpful/useful asset Now, his efforts are best used BEFORE any infringements, Not after!

How many 2A cases has Kevin won? I don't know anything about him.

 

[mhayd93]

The implementation of this law is going to be an absolute disaster. We technically do have an offensive weapon to fight it while any legal challenges slowly make their way through the courts; the initiative process.

According to the Oregon SoS, ballot initiatives may be used to change existing laws. It would take a lot of outside money and organizational support, but getting a ballot measure for 2023 that guts 114 would be a great form of resistance. After all, 114 is barely passing, and over the next few months a lot of fence-sitters or fudds who went YES might start having buyer's remorse.

 

[Longwalkhome]

Nice to know where the anti gun money comes from.

Report: Oregon Gun Control Ballot Measure Bankrolled by Out-of-State Money

A report from Bearing Arms indicates Oregon's Ballot Measure 114--a measure requiring a paid permit to purchase a gun--is being bankrolled by out-of-state donors.

www.breitbart.com

 

[PiratePast40]

Unfortunatly, Keven isn't a very helpful/useful asset Now, his efforts are best used BEFORE any infringements, Not after!

Why so? Don't you think that a lawsuit or request for injunction by OFF is plausible or can be effective? I spoke with Kevin last night about the direction we're heading and there is action going on right now. Do you think OFF is not able to partner with other groups? I think it's important that disparaging remarks be backed up, especially when people are being asked to donate to multiple efforts.

 

[PiratePast40]

What can we do about measure 114 individually?...

Can start with helping with the research and asking sheriffs and police departments how they intend to comply with 114. I specifically started a thread to help solicit and disseminate that information.

 

[Ura-Ki]

Why so? Don't you think that a lawsuit or request for injunction by OFF is plausible or can be effective? I spoke with Kevin last night about the direction we're heading and there is action going on right now. Do you think OFF is not able to partner with other groups? I think it's important that disparaging remarks be backed up, especially when people are being asked to donate to multiple efforts.

At this point, Keven is nothing more then a black hole people keep donating their money to, like I Posted earlier, Keven would be more effective before things get where they are! I know lots of folks here continue to support OFF, but at this point, any monies should be donated to the orgs BEST equipped to fight the ongoing legal battles in the courts, which is now where we are at, and OFF isn't one of those! What Keven SHOULD be doing is supporting one of them, ether GOA or FPC, Those are the two biggies who are going to take this all the way to the finish line for the win!

 

[ilikegunspdx]

At this point, Keven is nothing more then a black hole people keep donating their money to, like I Posted earlier, Keven would be more effective before things get where they are! I know lots of folks here continue to support OFF, but at this point, any monies should be donated to the orgs BEST equipped to fight the ongoing legal battles in the courts, which is now where we are at, and OFF isn't one of those! What Keven SHOULD be doing is supporting one of them, ether GOA or FPC, Those are the two biggies who are going to take this all the way to the finish line for the win!

100% agree. IMO we need funds directed to whoever is going to win in court. Fwiw here is an email I sent the Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC). I just sent it yesterday so have not heard back from them yet.

"Are you folks in the lead in trying to overturn OR measure 114? Do you have a specific effort in place to fight measure 114?

If so, do you have a fund set up for that effort? I would like to donate to an effective effort to overturn measure 114. I do not want to donate to a general fund where my $ may not be spent on the measure 114 fight."

I sent a similar email to GOA about a month ago and they basically said to donate to their general fund, so I didn't go any further with them. But that was before 114 passed so maybe things have changed with GOA I don't know (I doubt it has changed though).

 

[arakboss]

I like the hands off train wreck approach. Let it get really bad and then everybody will see the errors in their ways. It worked for SB941, no reason it can't work again.

 

[Uberhoo]

Oregon and Washington Democrats are planning bills to end their State preemption in 2023. Portland wants to go full NYC with prohibited places.

Violates equal protection, wouldn't it?

 

[Sporting Systems]

FPC and SAF will likely have suits field early next week. We are working with SAF's legal team the past 48 hours.

 

[ZigZagZeke]

What can we do about measure 114 individually? I believe the court case(s) to overturn this unconstitutional law is the most effective way to fight this.

We have seen in the last months that court cases are extremely effective in striking down these gun control laws, one after another. This is largely due to the Bruen decision that said the right shall not be infringed and shall be based on the gun laws that existed in 1791 (the time when the second amendment was created).

We need to push that imo and continue to build precedent that these unconstitutional gun laws will not stand! The body of precedent cases we can help create builds an inpenetrable fortress for protecting our gun rights far into the future (perhaps forever).

Perhaps this piece of sh!t legislation passing is just what we need to make us shift from the old "support the nra and they will fight it via lobbyists" (which is now ineffective Imo) to fighting these laws in court (which is now very effective post-Bruen imo). This could not have happened pre-Bruen so we have an unprecedented opportunity right now to make a difference by shifting our efforts to striking down these laws in court.

I think we need to identify the lead group who will be effective in fighting this in court and support them.

Actually, right now we have a window for action provided by our 6-3 majority on the USSC. Not until very recently, with the appointment of Coney, Kavanaugh, and Gorsuch (all Constitutionalists) added added to the voices of Thomas, Scalia, Alito, and Roberts, and the rulings in Heller, McDonald, and Bruen did we stand much chance in court. Now, even with the loss of Scalia, we have a favorable legal environment for reclaiming our individual civil rights.

Our successes so far have met with resistance in the lower courts, and the USSC is well aware, and very unhappy about the lower courts basically dragging their feet and thumbing their noses at the USSC. This is largely done by the lower federal courts due to ideological differences in violation of the rules of jurisprudence. These lower courts may be successful in stalling and delaying, like a two year old kicking and screaming as they are dragged from the room, but sooner or later the USSC will bring the hammer down by issuing a clarifying ruling, or vacating a lower court ruling, or at least overturning it. The process of doing so can take years. This is the case with Bruen. The lower courts were playing games with legal scope and scrutiny to obfuscate and delay legal change. Bruen threw out the artificial system of scrutiny and public interest, and replaced it with historical precedent. The wheels of justice move slowly at this level, and it's often two steps forward and one step back. But we will get there as long as our window of judicial opportunity remains open. With the loss of any one one of the present Constitutionalist justices and their replacement by Biden that window will start to close.

Heller established an individual right to keep and bear arms. McDonald applied that right to the states. Bruen fundamentally changed the process used to determine the constitutionality of a 2nd Amendment limiting law, leaving no way to offset infringements by citing "public interest". All of this will take time.

But to return to the situation around the nation concerning magazine limits, semi-automatic weapons bans, licenses to buy or own, training requirements, and tracking and public disclosure of personal firearms ownership data, these are all burdens upon the 2nd Amendment that must since Bruen, be re-evaluated with a new criteria that asks whether this type of ban or regulation has been long established tradition.

Our weapons in this battle are the courts, not the ballot box or lobbying. Much of the heartburn associated with the NRA has been that lobbying is ineffective and the NRA was slow to recognize it. But the ballot box and the legislature are subservient to the the courts. Our warriors will be the hired guns that will carry our arguments forward and obtain specific court rulings negating egregious anti-gun laws, rather than those lobbying against such laws. We have already seen several dozen such cases argued by these hired guns, with a great deal of success. Organizations like GOA, FPC, NRA-ILA, SAF, and Guns America have all pursued violations of the 2nd Amendment successfully. Both FPC and the NRA-ILA were instrumental in obtain the Bruen ruling.

That said, if you want to do something about egregious ant-gun laws it's time to support the aforementioned organizations financially. Time and money are necessary for the legal process to be effective. When you see a new ruling come down, or you like a new lawsuit that's been filed, note who is providing the time and talent to push that result and donate to them accordingly. It's luckily the one area where we outgun the gun grabbers. They may have an army of deadbeat college students with signs, and they may have the money from billionaires like Steve Ballmer's wife and other people who fell into mega-money despite being progressive idiots, but we have an army of 100 million gun owners who generally can afford to contribute...if we contribute. And as Shakespeare wrote, "Aye, there's the rub." Our side is easily discouraged and prone to be disillusioned and angered by even the slightest political or legal compromise, often walking away from people fighting in our won best interests. That is a self-defeating attitude. The reality is that sometimes we can get 98% of what we want by giving the remaining 2% to the other side as a bone that they can hold up to their constituents to prove their worth. And really, if they are such poor negotiators why wouldn't we prefer that they remain our opponents?

The purists among us need to take a step back, stop hyperventilating, and see that we are in fact now winning. All that will be required from us is patience and the willingness to back a presidential candidate who see ours side if the 2nd Amendment so that the right new justices get appointed to the USSC. Everything else is secondary.

 

[Pete F]

FPC has been emailing me for the fight/lawsuit against 114. They are ready and need support. They have an excellent track record and have overturned several attempts to bypass Bruin. They go into court with lawsuits.

GOA is still on the bigger picture, shutting down the states/cities that are trying bypass the Bruin decision.

I donate to each on a regular basis.

 

[Pete F]

None of these groups can do much until someone is affected by the new law. They need a victim.