Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Oregon's proposed gun law

They're voting on it in Nov. This is an excerpt from a Foxnews article:



I live next door in Idaho and we travel through OR quite often. As it is, the only way a non-res can carry in OR is to get an OR CC permit. They won't honor any other state's permit. If this thing passes, it's for sure that I won't be getting a permit. Their requirements will be just plain nuts.

The SC will shove that law up their ass and tell them the 2nd Amendment is the only permit necessary.

Blue States are going to pass schit like this all across America.

All in blatant violation of NYSRPA v Bruen

By the time these bills make it to the SC, either the make-up of the court will have changed, or the Democrats have succeed in packing the court.

Either way, Thomas needs to watch his back and learn to sleep without the use of pillows.

Pretty much what New York is doing, going to be lawsuits for years.

Virtue signalling designed to appeal to the Willamette Valley corridor ultra liberals.

Like Bob said, this will proceed through the courts and be shot down. The dims throw [bleep] at the wall to see what sticks.

Watching tucker last night and a commercial came on showing a woman that had a brother killed in portland saying she is supporting it because it will help get illegal guns off the street.

That’s the pitch to the masses. Additional restrictions/requirements for legal folks = less illegal guns.

Yeah but have you seen Roy’s deer?

And for all those years a New York citizens rights are violated.

Aren't libtards the shizzle!!

West Virginia has a two step process to be able to carry a weapon...

Step 1: Enter West Virginia

Step 2: Carry

Idaho's almost the same IF you're a resident. Non-residents must have an acceptable permit from their home state and almost all states' permits qualify.

I know a guy who used to live in a state with extremely oppressive anti-gun laws. That state's laws prohibited the ownership of certain firearms (of the AK and AR design), certain magazines (over the arbitrary capacity of 10 rounds), certain types of handguns that had not been approved by the state based on arbitrary conditions and they effectively prohibited the carry of any firearm unless you were a political insider.

This guy continued to own AR and AK style weapons, standard capacity magazines and "unsafe" handguns, and he carried the handguns he owned wherever he went. This went on for over 30 years before he moved to a free state.

Granted, had law enforcement been involved in his life, he probably would have been fined and jailed many times over, and in one incident from 2020 the laws resulted in him choosing to not engage in the fundamental right to self defense, but in the end, the laws accomplished nothing other than criminalizing lawful behavior. The guns and ammo were not affected in the way that lawmakers claimed they would be.

I live in oregon. this proposal is just a bill slipped in by a group of crazies. No way it will fly. Fact is when we had a gun run during the anitfa riots etc etc 90% of the gun applicants were first time gun buyers thus obviously the majority were liberal democrats. (per 3 gunshop owners I know). This bill is nothing to do with gun violence, which oregon dosent have to any extreme, but about paranoia that 'we' will take them over violently. Which wont happen either. The democrates like their guns too!

Anybody with me in having the Supremes having their own law enforcement. I mean, the IRS is getting 87000 agents that are armed. Why not have the Court have a 100000 armed agents to enforce their decisions. It would thrill my soul to see someone like Hochul being arrested for doing the crap that she is pulling to avoid having to abide by Bruen.

Wow.

You really are stupid.

My off the wall take regarding states boldly defying the Bruen decision is that they know they will be challenged and lose but they want to keep all the firearms rights groups tied up in court and spending money. I believe the goal is to financially break them so they can then have their way with him control.

Could be part of it…

When State government have their laws challenged in court. They are defended by the States Attorney General. To an anti-gun politician, it’s a free a defense of their unconstitutional laws, even though it’s tax payer dollars that fund that defense.

The ‘pro gun’ lobby has to pay out of their coffers and by donations to challenge and fight these things. It does get expensive.

🦫

A Lille bit, but more likely they know that by the time this reaches the SC, it will be controlled by liberals.

You have a lot more faith in the retards from Portland, Salem, Eugene, Ashland than I do

Portland needs to fall into the Columbia, then it might become a decent place to live again.