What do you want your firearm laws to look like in Oregon?

[MrsAndy]

Regarding these Firearm Freedom Acts...as the 1942 case Wickard vs. Filburn showed, the Federal Government can and will use the Commerce Clause to regulate intrastate as well as interstate commerce. Until the referenced case is overthrown (or until the Feds actually start abiding by the original intent of the Constitution), these States' efforts, while certainly well intentioned, are also certainly doomed to fail.

Keith

Keith,

The idea here is to send a message to washington that we won't stand for them regulating what is ours to regulate. That we aren't OK with the way things are done. If even half the states send this message, they will realize that people are fed up. Yes, they use money to regulate us. That's the whole problem. Have you heard the argument that people don't understand why the legal drinking age is 21? Want to know why that is? The government forced it. They simply stated they will pull funding for roads that won't be save if drunk 18 year olds are driving on them. I think it Vermont or Connetitcut that put up a long fight on this and finally gave in. Because roads are expensive. It's extortion!

Texas just stood up last week and told the feds, we are sick of you trying to regulate and force "no child left behind", which is a huge failure. They told them to take their money and shove it.

For the FFA guy that started the thread, I spoke with you that weekend. Good to see you here. I am for it. Let me look at some of these threads you have posted and get some information and I will help with some feedback. Don't let money or interstate commerce regulate your rights. Take back what was intended to be our rights (state regulation of these things). I love Texas for this. You have to be willing to fund yourself though. It can be done. I will be watching them to see how this pans out.

Thank you guys for starting this. (I am the one that talked about the initiative alternative to pushing this through)

 

[Karma]

As far as I am concerned, the only laws that the government has the right to enforce are on who can own them. If someone is a felon who hasn't had their rights restored, then they can't own a gun for example. I am talking about a real felon, not someone who was busted for copying dvd movies or cd's. I am talking about the original federal definition of a felon. Otherwise any one of us could find ourselves felons for speeding tickets or some crap like that!

They have no right to tell us what kind of firearm we can own. They also have no right as far as I am concerned to require a chl for upstanding citizens. If you are legal to own a gun, you should be able to carry it for protection.

I am not sure what part of "shall not be infringed" is so hard for people to understand.

 

[cyborg]

At the risk of sounding like a broken record I am going to restate somethings I have already stated as they are so crucial to our futures they are worth stating again.

States have the authority to regulate themselves. This is guaranteed by the constitution of the US. The federal governments authorities are purposefully limited by this document as the writers had just gotten away from Monarchs and dictators and VERY SPECIFICALLY wrote the constitution to protect against omnipotent central authority.

The details are within the constitution itself and the Tenth amendment is merely a punctuation of this fact. It is like they were saying...."Hey YOU!, just in case you don't get it... the feds are not omnipotent and were never meant to be"

The tenth amendment to the US constitution reads.....

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

THis means WE have the final authority. Our country has a rich history of exerting our states rights. Please keep in mind that essentially each of our states is a country of its own and the feds authorities are merely to assist our states in coordinating together. We are a FEDERATION.

The feds work for us and when they begin to bully us to do what THEY want we have the right and constitutional authority to nullify their laws.

Bottom line people... if enough states simply pass these FFA's the feds can stomp their feet in THEIR court rooms all day long and it wont matter. They can pass THEIR FEDERAL LAWS all they want and it will be a non issue for us. THEY are overstepping their authorities and the time has come to once again use state nullification laws to exert our state rights. Our states have a long history of doing this and I can think of no more important right worth standing up for than our rights to bear arms.

Thay have wiped their federal asses all over the 2nd amendment...let's show them what 30 or more states can do when we pass FFA's. Look at medical marijuana for an example. Feds say it is illegal but many states just do it. They have nullified the feds authority. We CAN LEGALLY DO SO and should nullify illegal federal firearms laws in our state.

If the concept and long history of state nullification of tyrannical federal laws is a new subject for you PLEASE do yourself a favor and visit this site.

www.oregon.tenthamendmentcenter.com

We are having this same discussion over there nad are planning the Oregon FFA.

Larry Walton

 

[SSG]

Having a million guns in the closet does one no good if he can't buy ammo...

 

[Oohrah]

No gun laws for the law abidding are good ones. Until we rid ourselves of the left radical law makers, nothing but struggle and fight to remain we we are. Until they go for another camel's nose under the tent occurs. Even our own ranks thought a compromise on the gun show background checks would keep the wolves at bay! Not! We had an opportunity to pass an interstate concealed carry license that would be honored in those states with simular requirements. Thanks to our two votes of NO, it's start over again with those who will work in our behalf. Oregon will not honor any out of state licenses, but there a few that for some reason allow us the right to carry. Time to clean house or go the way of Calif. where ammo will be a thing of the past. Can't remember who it was, but a member of this forum thought I was full of it when I stated it would remain a possible fight to keep the Gun ban from renewal. His remark was, "Not in Washington would this happen, as the people who live here are opposed to that. OK maybe I'm missing something, but it appears in that state, it is presently a consideration. Again the lawmakers need to be replaced until someone is found who will get it.

 

[fingolfen]

... well since you asked...

Honestly there's no difference in how I want my firearm laws to look in Oregon or Federally. I see the Second Amendment as enumerating and affirming an individual inalienable right to self-defense with the use of deadly force when appropriate.

I do not want to see handgun bans.
I do not want to see magazine bans based on capacity.
I do not want to see so-called "assault weapon" bans

I do believe there needs to be some mechanism to legally keep firearms out of the hands of criminals - since our criminal "justice" system routinely sets free individuals who would have been buried UNDER the jail in ages past.

I do not want to see a national registration of firearms.
I do not want firearms to be subject to "legislative engineering" - including micro stamping or other "safety locks"

I want to see the Hughes Amendment repealed.
I do not want to see arbitrary limits on the kind or amount of ammunition an individual may possess

I want to see stiff penalties for use of firearms in commission of a crime.
I want people to be able to carry concealed or openly as they believe the situation dictates.
I want people to be encouraged and have opportunities to learn marksmanship and practical firearm techniques.

 

[rsmccsman]

I want nation wide concealed carry reciprocity, freedom to own anything we want, Fully auto, any magazine capacity, supressors, SBR & SBSs. The object is not evil, it can be used for good or bad. Register Felons not guns.

 

[SSG]

A rational Gun law:

- Everyone takes a class, pass no pass, in the use and storage of firearms. They must demonstrate to some accuracy standard.

- After passing the above class, they get a back ground check...if pass, they get a card.

- When they buy a gun at a gunstore, the card is swiped, saying yeah or ney, like a debit card to the purchaser's ability purchase a gun. no serial numbers, no private data...yes or no.....gun is sold, and no record, other then the gunstore record is kept of that transaction. Cops can still track guns, but not at an Orwellian 'take away all the guns' type of level.

- Card holder can buy anything, carry anything, anywhere in the US.

- Laws changed to not only protect citizens that help others, but provide some incentive to do so, vs criminalizing ect a good samaritan... those that are not willing to help others, protect others, are not encouraged to own a gun...but not restricted from doing so.

Only card holders can buy and sell guns to each other....card holder can go to a website, run the number, and get a yes or no whether the buyer is legal to purchase that firearm from him. Receipts and bills of sale encouraged.

- Ammunition can only be bought by card holders and again, no record, just yeah or neay...

In my fantasy world of rational and logical laws...

- Gun accidents should go down due to proper training and storage
- With everyone carrying, and support of good Samaritans, crime should go down
- Gun prices on Class III should plummit
- With more peeps shooting, and shooting class three stuff, our govt will be more 'respectfull' of the constitution and rule of law
- With only card holders being able to buy ammo, with in no time, criminals with guns will run out of ammo, unless supplied by card holders...ammo lots, tracked by transaction numbers and card holder use, would make quick investigative work... to root out straw buyer...

 

[tionico]

A rational Gun law:

- Everyone takes a class, pass no pass, in the use and storage of firearms. They must demonstrate to some accuracy standard.

NOT GOOD... THIS IS, AT ROOT, AN INFRINGEMENT. WHAT TEST DOES ANYONE HAVE TO TAKE TO VOTE, WRITE A LETTER TO THE EDITOR, ATTEND CHURCH, TRAVEL FROM ONE STATE INTO ANOTHER? SO WHY INFRINGE THIS RIGHT IN AN UNIQUE WAY?

- After passing the above class, they get a back ground check...if pass, they get a card.


LEAVE OFF THE CLASS, THEN THE BACKGROUND CHECK AND CARD WORKS OK.. WITH CAVEATS MENTIONED BELOW

- When they buy a gun at a gunstore, the card is swiped, saying yeah or ney, like a debit card to the purchaser's ability purchase a gun. no serial numbers, no private data...yes or no.....gun is sold, and no record, other then the gunstore record is kept of that transaction. Cops can still track guns, but not at an Orwellian 'take away all the guns' type of level.


SWIPING THE CARD HAS THE POTENTIAL OF CREATING A SAVABLE RECORD. NOT GOOD. OTHER THAN A WARRANTY CARD, WHAT RECORD OF THE TRANSACTION DOES HOME DEPOT KEEP WHEN YOU BUY A CHAINSAW OR A WASHING MACHINE? THEN WHY KEEP A RECORD OF THIS TRANSACTION? GUNS ARE TOOLS... TREAT THEM LIKE A CHAINSAW, NAIL GUN, LAWNMOWER. TRUST ME (AND NOT THE GOVERNMENT) WHEN I SAY HAVING ANY RECORD CAN, AND WILL LIKELY, LEAD TO THE PRECISE ORWELLIAN SCENARIO YOU DENY WOULD HAPPEN. FBI DO NOT KEEP A RECORD OF THE PROCEED CODES GIVEN... YET. A SIMPLE EXECUTIVE ORDER FROM THE KENYAN COULD CHANGE THAT IN A HEARTBEAT.... THE MECHANISM IS ALREADY IN PLACE. DON'T PUT THE MECHANISM THERE, THAT IS THE ONLY WAY IT CANNOT HAPPEN. DO YOU TRUST THE GOVERNMENT ENOUGH TO DO WHAT THEY SAY THEY WILL? I DON'T......

- Card holder can buy anything, carry anything, anywhere in the US.

FINE. BUT DON'T MAKE IT A CARD THAT MAKES A RECORD, AS AN ATM CARD. PRESENT THE CARD, PERHAPS WITH PHOTO ON IT TO PREVENT CHEATING. VENDOR SEES CARD, PROCEEDS WITH SALE. NO SWPIING, NO RECORD, NO NUMBERS GENERATED. NO WAY TO STORE OR KEEP RECORD CAUSE THERE SHOULD BE NONE.

- Laws changed to not only protect citizens that help others, but provide some incentive to do so, vs criminalizing ect a good samaritan... those that are not willing to help others, protect others, are not encouraged to own a gun...but not restricted from doing so.

Only card holders can buy and sell guns to each other....card holder can go to a website, run the number, and get a yes or no whether the buyer is legal to purchase that firearm from him. Receipts and bills of sale encouraged.

OK, FOR THE FIRST PART. NO WEBSITE, NO NUMBER. POSSESSION OF CARD IS PROOF OF ELIGIBILITY. AS IT STANDS, IF I WANT TO CONFIRM A PARTY IN A TRANSACTION IS A LEGAL RESIDENT OF MY STATE, I ASK TO SEE HIS DRIVING LICENSE. MY EYES CONFIRM ITS HIS MUG ON THE FRONT, HAS SOME ADDRESS IN MY STATE, I PROCEED WITH THE SALE. I DO NOT RUN HIS NUMBER WITH WASHINGTON DOL TOO VERIFY ITS NOT A FAKE. NO MORE RECORD OF SALE THAN IF I SOLD HIM A USED CHAINSAW. THEY'VE BOTH TOOLS... NOTHING MORE.

- Ammunition can only be bought by card holders and again, no record, just yeah or neay...

AGAIN, SHOW THE CARD, THAT SHOULD BE ENOUGH. OTHERWISE, OK. MIGHT POSSIBLY REDUCE AVAILABILITY OF AMMO TO CRIMINAL SORTS.

In my fantasy world of rational and logical laws...

- Gun accidents should go down due to proper training and storage

LIKELY, AND A GOOD THING

- With everyone carrying, and support of good Samaritans, crime should go down

AGAIN, LIKELY. ADDED BENEFIT OF CRIMINALS HAVING A HARDER TIME OF GETTING GUNS, THOUGH I RATHER SUSPECT STOLEN GUNS WOULD INCREASE AS A SOURCE OF SUPPLY, WHICH IS ALREADY THE PRINCIPAL SOURCE, ACCORDING TO THE FBI

- Gun prices on Class III should plummit
- With more peeps shooting, and shooting class three stuff, our govt will be more 'respectfull' of the constitution and rule of law

MORE RESPECT AND FEAR FROM GOVERNMENT WOULD BE A GOOD THING

- With only card holders being able to buy ammo, with in no time, criminals with guns will run out of ammo, unless supplied by card holders...

LIKELY, EXCEPT THAT THEFTS WILL LIKELY INCREASE

ammo lots, tracked by transaction numbers and card holder use, would make quick investigative work... to root out straw buyer...

NO WAY, NOHOW. TRACKING AMMO IS WHAT CALIFORNIA IS IMPLEMENTING WITH A NEW SET OF DRACONIAN AND INSANE LAWS. IT IS PROJECTED TO MORE THAN DOUBLE THE COST OF AMMO AND SEVERELY RESTRICT SUPPLY....... AND GENERATE A NEW CLASS OF FELONS, THOSE WHO HAND A BOX OF .22 LR SHELLS TO THEIR PAL AT THE GUNRANGE, BUY A BOX OF NINE MM IN MEDFORD ON THEIR WAY NORTH, THEN DON'T SHOOT THEM ALL IN SEATTLE, AND BRING THE REMAINING TEN BACK IN THE TRUNK OF THEIR CAR. NONSENSE. AGAIN, NO RECORD. AMMO IS LIKE POPTARTS, 16d NAILS, MOTOR OIL.. SOMETHING MANY PEOPLE USE, AND WHEN USED UP, GO AND BUY MORE.

THIS SCENARIO MAINTAINS THE MINDSET THAT GUNS ARE EVIL AND MUST BE CONTROLLED AND REGULATED BY GOVERNMENT. READ WHAT PART OF DAILY LIFE GUNS HELD FOR THE COLONISTS BEFORE THE WAR OF INDEPENDENCE. IT IS THAT PLACE THE FRAMERS DETERMINED TO PRESERVE IN PERPETUITY IN THE WRITING OF OUR FOUNDING DOCUMENTS. ANYTHING SHORT OF A RETURN TO THAT MINDSET IS AN INFRINGEMENT ON A RIGHT GOD HAS GIVEN US. EVEN THE CARD IN THE LIMITED SCOPE I GIVE IT ABOVE IS AN INFRINGEMENT, ALBEIT A SLIGHT AND TOLERABLE ONE. BEYOND THAT I WILL NOT TOLERATE MORE. WHEN GUNS ARE CONSIDERED AND TREATED IN THE SAME WAY AS BICYCLES, SPLITTING MAULS, FRYING PANS, WE WILL HAVE RETURNED TO THAT COLONIAL TIME. I CAN RUN INTO YOU ON MY BICYCLE, WHACK YOU ONN THE HEAD WITH MY SPLITTING MAUL OR FRYING PAN.... AND SHOULD SUFFER THE CRIMINAL, FINANCIAL, AND MORAL CONSEQUENCES AT LAW. UNTIL THEN, I MUST REMAIN FREE TO OWN ALL THE ABOVE, NO INFRINGEMENT. IT IS NOT THE ITEM I USE TO PERPETRATE THE HARM, IT IS THE DESIRE IN MY HEART TO DO SO THAT IS A VIOLATION OF MORAL, CIVIL, AND CRIMINAL LAW. DEAL WITH THAT AND IT WILL SUFFICE.

 

[cyborg]

SSG, I love that! tionico your suggestions of modifications are great as well!
I think you two have hit the area where proper balance between responsibility and freedom could be agreed upon. With a bit more thought and polish this could be something very workable. Does everyone agree that these suggestions are good ones and could be the starting point /basis of a good FFA in Oregon? As i read these two posts I see them as OUR two sides. Some of US who are pro gun rights see a need for some "rational" ability to track firearms and ammo where as others of us want any and all vestiges of "Gun control" wiped out. This is OUR in house debate and the one we need to come to grips with before we can move ahead with an FFA that most of us can support.

If we do, we need to think about the wording of such an FFA. Do we have any attorneys who could work with us on this?

Have you seen this link of FFAs across the country? It seems that Montana and Tennessee are no longer alone. Utah has passed an FFA.

http://firearmsfreedomact.com/

Wyoming is set to pass one with TEETH. Jailing feds that try to impose unconstitutional laws on state citizens. YES! Finally....someone is growing a set of balls!

Why not here in Oregon too?