Strict gun bill on Oregon ballot

[jef955]

You eat your sammich one bite at a time, if you know what I mean.

Yeah, it just never gets any better.. I voted on the pipe dream that Dan Cox would get elected, which wouldnt have helped the gun issue here even if he did. 100% democrat controlled, in my district just about everyone ran unopposed. Why bother anymore, its a waste of a trip. Something like 97 percent democrat vote. For evey one R there 100 D. I HATE it here !

[jef955]

I really like PA, and have friends in West Decatur, but I feel like PA is just 10-20 years behind MD. I love Clearfield county and north, but I would hate to move to the same crap that I put up with here for years, being that I can retire in 2 yr and 11 mo (not that i'm counting). I dunno, just gets old.. But you are correct, they just keep taking a little at a time !

[c45man]

We should all hope that such a referendum does not avail itself in Pa. With what this state is turning into, I believe the low information voters would prevail and such a referendum would get the majority. And yes, there would be a respectful number of gun owners that would vote for it just as sure that there was a number of gun owners that voted for Fetterman.

As far as challenges to the Oregon referendum, it will not be settled anytime soon. Consider all the CA., NY., and IL laws that are being challenged.

[2DogsBarking]

"Purge" the sponsors.....................

[ImminentDanger]

State judge places hold on Oregon’s gun law
By Gillian Flaccus and Lindsasy Whitehurst - AP - December 6, 2022
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...d-state-judge/

PORTLAND, Ore. — A ruling by a state court judge placed Oregon’s tough new gun law on hold late Tuesday, just hours after a federal court judge allowed the ban on the sale and transfer of high-capacity magazines to take effect this week.

The ruling by Harney County Judge Robert Raschio threw the implementation of Measure 114 into limbo and Oregon Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum said in a Twitter thread that her office will seek emergency action by the Oregon Supreme Court.

Rosenblum will file an immediate appeal with the state’s high court seeking to “align the result in our state courts with the federal court’s well-reasoned and thoughtful decision,” the statement said. That filing is likely to come Wednesday morning.

“It’s been a busy day for Measure 114, Oregon’s new gun safety law, which is supposed to go into effect Thursday. A federal and a state judge both issued rulings today,” Rosenblum’s Twitter thread said. “As of now, the law cannot go into effect on Thursday.”

The lawsuit in Harney County, filed by Gun Owners of America Inc. and the Gun Owners Foundation, sought to have the entire law placed on hold while its constitutionality is decided. The state lawsuit makes the claims under the Oregon Constitution, however, not the U.S. Constitution. That means Raschio’s ruling is binding in the entire state for now.

Earlier Tuesday, a federal judge in Portland delivered an initial victory to proponents of the sweeping gun-control measure approved by Oregon voters. U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut allowed the ban on the sale and transfer of new high-capacity magazines to take effect Thursday while giving law enforcement more time to set up a system for permits that will now be required to buy or transfer a gun.

Immergut granted a 30-day delay before the permit-to-purchase mandate takes effect, but did not quash it entirely as gun rights advocates had wanted.

[TSimonetti]

1/2 right, 1/2 wrong. They did try to fix it when they realized what had been done. Legislation passed on party lines, vetoed by Tom Wolf. It's still unconstitutional.

Pa Republicans helped pass Act 77. Which changed election laws in direct violation of the PA Constitution.

[ImminentDanger]

Judge Places Hold on Oregon Gun Law; State to Appeal
By Jay Clemons - 07 December 2022
https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/or...07/id/1099564/

An Oregon judge suspended the state's voter-approved gun control measure hours after a federal court judge agreed that a ban on the sale and transfer of high-capacity magazines could soon take effect.

The Tuesday ruling from Harney County Judge Robert Raschio essentially puts the Thursday implementation of Measure 114 on hold.

However, that could be a short-term decision after Oregon Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum pledged to take the matter to the state Supreme Court.

"What's next? We will petition to the Oregon Supreme Court ASAP, seeking to align the result in our state courts with the federal court's well-reasoned and thoughtful decision," Rosenblum tweeted on Tuesday.

The initial injunctive lawsuit was filed by the Gun Owners of America, the Gun Owners Foundation, and several other independent gun organizations, according to the Washington Examiner.

The desired intent: placing a momentary hold on Oregon's gun-control measure, while its constitutionality gets more clarification through the courts, the Examiner reported.

Measure 114 requires fingerprinting and training courses for new firearms buyers, along with a criminal background check. It also prohibits the sale, import, or transfer of gun magazines with more than 10 rounds unless they are "owned by law enforcement or military members or were possessed before the measure's approval."

For high-capacity magazine owners who've been grandfathered in (prior to Raschio's "hold" ruling), the weapons could only be used on personal property or at firing ranges, shooting competitions, or when hunting as permissible by state law.

Also, Measure 114 does not require a permit for receiving firearms as gifts, or if the magazines are "passed from another private owner" to someone 18 years or older.

Measure 114 generated 50.7% support from the Oregon voters Tuesday, prompting the immediate lawsuit and Raschio's reversal.

Soon after Tuesday's measure garnered passage, U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut allowed the ban on the sale and transfer of high-capacity magazines to go into effect Thursday.

Immergut had also granted a 30-day gap before the law's permit-to-purchase mandate could go into effect.

"The evidentiary record also shows that large-capacity magazines are disproportionately used in crimes involving mass shootings," Immergut wrote, while adding that plaintiffs failed to show how magazines carrying more than 10 rounds are "arms" protected by the Second Amendment.

In June, however, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen case.

By a 5-4 vote, the justices maintained that any gun ownership restrictions must have a basis rooted in U.S. tradition, dating to the ratification of the Second Amendment.

We have yet to see what final effect the ruling in the Bruen case will have on real life scenarios...

Now, if only the USSC would right the wrong of the 'Wickard v Filburn' ruling and get the Federal Government's boot off the necks of the States & THE PEOPLE. (I'm not holding my breath.)

...

[ImminentDanger]

Oregon judge halts voter-approved high-capacity magazine ban
By Gillian Flaccus - Associated Press - Thursday, December 15, 2022
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...y-magazine-ban

PORTLAND, Ore. - An Oregon judge handed guns rights advocates a victory Thursday and placed a new, voter-approved ban on high-capacity magazines on hold until questions about its constitutionality can be decided.

Harney County Judge Robert Raschio released the written ruling after a lengthy court hearing earlier this week in which attorneys for gun rights groups sought a preliminary injunction to stop the narrowly passed ban on magazines of more than 10 rounds.

"That the large capacity magazine bans promote public safety is mere speculation," Raschio wrote. "The court cannot sustain restraint on constitutional right on mere speculation that the restriction could promote public safety."

The ruling followed ones Raschio made Tuesday that temporarily blocked a permit-to-purchase provision of Measure 114 and another part of the law that would prevent the sale of a gun until the results of a background check come back. Under current federal law, a gun sale can proceed by default if the background check takes longer than three business days - the so-called Charleston loophole, because it allowed the assailant to purchase the gun used in a 2015 South Carolina mass shooting.

The lawsuit in Harney County, filed by Gun Owners of America Inc., the Gun Owners Foundation and several individual gun owners, seeks to have the entire law placed on hold while its constitutionality is decided. The state lawsuit specifically makes the claims under the Oregon Constitution, not the U.S. Constitution.

Measure 114 requires a permit, criminal background check, fingerprinting and hands-on training course for new firearms buyers. It also bans the sale, transfer or import of gun magazines over 10 rounds unless they are owned by law enforcement or a military member or were owned before the measure's passage. Those who already own high-capacity magazines can only possess them in their homes or use them at a firing range, in shooting competitions or for hunting as allowed by state law after the measure takes effect.

Gun sales and requests for background checks soared in the weeks since the measure was approved because of fears the new law would prevent or significantly delay the purchase of new firearms under the permitting system.

Multiple gun rights groups, local sheriffs and gun store owners have sued, saying the law violates Americans' constitutional right to bear arms. All of those lawsuits were filed in federal courts except for the one in Harney County.

A federal judge in Portland hearing a different challenge to the law under the U.S. Constitution on Dec. 6 delivered an initial victory to proponents of the sweeping gun-control measure that passed in the Nov. 8 midterms.

In that ruling, U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut allowed the ban on the sale and transfer of new high-capacity magazines to take effect. She also granted a 30-day delay before the law's permit-to-purchase mandate takes effect, but did not quash it entirely as gun rights advocates had wanted.

But Raschio's subsequent ruling the same day threw the law into limbo: Because that lawsuit challenged Measure 114 under the Oregon Constitution, it held precedence in the state, legal experts said.