Posted on 12/02/2022 6:46:14 PM PST by CFW
One of the strictest gun control laws in the nation is facing a new National Rifle Association-backed legal challenge as a federal judge prepares to decide whether to delay the measure's implementation.
Two former Oregon lawmakers, a sporting goods store, the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) and the Oregon State Shooting Association — the NRA's state affiliate — filed the lawsuit Thursday, arguing the voter-approved Measure 114 places "severe and unprecedented burdens" on those seeking to exercise their Second Amendment rights.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
“”Delaying implementation of this constitutional policy while the merits are litigated would likely result in unnecessary deaths” and hinder Oregon’s efforts to “reduce the risk of a massacre within its borders,” Senior Assistant Attorney General Brian Simmonds Marshall argued in court documents this week.”
____
If they would lock up the criminals, and not let them out of jail immediately upon arrest, I suspect there would be less crime in the State. Instead, they want to suppress the rights of the law-abiding in order to give the criminals more freedom. Heck, they don’t enforce the current gun laws on the books, so this is certainly not about crime or the homicide rate.
>It’s good to see gun rights organizations and a couple of former Oregon politicians fighting back on this obvious violation of citizens’ rights.
Yes, but this appears to be the new tack of the left following the crystal clear Bruen decision confirming individual rights.
They now slam through bills that are blatantly, defiantly against 2A and the Bruen decision and keep us fighting individual defensive battles to undo each one — where in a sane world those bills would be immediately tanked.
The *right* action at this point would be to get rid of the underlying morass of the 1968 gun control act and the national firearms act of 1934; and in various states to get rid of the silly and convoluted add-ons (e.g., in MI there’s now shall-issue but still one cannot carry “a pneumatic gun, dagger, dirk, razor, stiletto, or knife having a blade over 3 inches in length, or any other dangerous or deadly weapon or instrument” because muh gangsters and 1931 law). As usual though, the GOP is not interested in ratcheting *down* control because the fear of worse things is their fundraising strategy — making things better has no margin for them.
In Oregon I’ve read about panic buying; I’m sure many small FFLs will go under (as intended); and when the bad law is shot down, the damage wrought in lives and livelihoods won’t be repaired. Similarly in each place where leftists fly in the face of the SC decision; people die, others might get arrested and have their lives ruined, jobs destroyed and businesses wrecked.
>“”Delaying implementation of this constitutional policy while the merits are litigated would likely result in unnecessary deaths” and hinder Oregon’s efforts to “reduce the risk of a massacre within its borders,” Senior Assistant Attorney General Brian Simmonds Marshall argued in court documents this week.”
Delaying implementation of this law would hinder Oregon leftists’ ability to destroy law-abiding firearms businesses, which is the whole point of this action. Like a conviction after a murder, justice doesn’t repair the harm.
Yes. Get rid of.both of the old laws. They’re patently unconstitutional and do a great deal of harm to innocent citizens and to any remaining respect for law in USA.
I agree, with the added point that this was an initiative petition. No legislature would have attempted something so blatantly un-Constitutional
It's called "lawfare"....a skill that Rat Party Headquarters has mastered. Just remember: 95% of this nation's lawyers are Rats.
They were silent with the bumpstock ban… so I switched to gun owners of America.
After the Heller decision in 2008, Washington DC tried every trick in the book to prevent residents from owning guns. They got slapped down in the courts time after time, and eventually gave up.
I think the courts will act even faster this time around. The Supreme Ct. was clear about the right to carry firearms. The libs make a lot of noise and get a lot of headlines, but in the end they’re going to lose in court.
It would be nice to see the permit to purchase and magazine limits be struck down, is unconstitutional in Oregon, giving other states with similar schemes, the chance to be thrown out
I’m willing to bet that if you removed Portland, Eugene, and maybe a few other cities is immersion, would have overwhelmingly failed
What part of the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed don’t the lefties understand?!
The sheriff in my county(An elected position) says they don’t have the manpower to enforce this nonsense.
About time they did something other than fluff lapierre.
If this were something opposed by the Dems in charge, they’d find a judge to invalidate it on the grounds that it combines too many issues in a single petition. I’m waiting for a lawyer to challenge it on thst basis.
All of it.
“No legislature would have attempted something so blatantly un-Constitutional.”
You are joking, right?
“Forget it Jake, It’s Oregon.”
Not in Oregon. Believe me, they have the numbers, and they pull some crap, but they wouldn’t have done this. This was some do-gooders getting enough signatures to get the initiative on the ballot, and then “democracy” happened.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.